69 replies to this topic

[Telmasa]

That would be great, Helaton, except for the fact that all weapons aside from missiles get extended range.

If CERML just fizzled out completely at 440m, then yeah, it'd work great. But since they continue to go out to 740m...it doesn't make sense to make them curve or something whacky, so I just don't see how it can work.

[Helaton]

Sorry that was the idea, after their max range for the weapon, convergence goes random the farther out it goes.

So if an CERML at 440m was pinpoint, at 660 it would have a variance of 50% (splashing side torsos if aimed at CT) and at 880m better luck hitting the arms. If you shot 500m, it would probably still be pretty pinpoint or at least enough.

Thats kinda what I was thinking. Although I'm not sure what this would do carriers or short range weapons like MPL, SPL, ERSL etc. Maybe a firestarter would look like a lightshow at that point.

[Astarot]

I like this idea a lot, only I want to make a few suggestions.

A: DON'T make it random, this game isn't world of tanks my shot shouldn't randomly fly off into the sky because of RNG, instead what I suggest is having markers on the hud that marks each mech section that has a weapon. a little plus so to speak that will move across your screen for you to know what section of your mech is aiming where. Lets say a plus with a RA above it means right arm. plus with CT means central torso. And ectra.

B: I also believe that mechs with mobile arm actuators, the arms of said mechs should take less of a convergence debuff, allowing for low arm slung mechs to be desirable for different reasons, then a mech with high hardpoint mounts.

[DoctorZuber]

It's an interesting idea, but largely irrelevant, unless you are a brawler . . .

Basically you are saying that beams should be fixed focus, and should always converge at some arbitrary point no matter what you aim at. Even if implemented like this, the net result is still going to remain very similar to what we currently have.

At max range, or near to max range, where the convergence is nearly a point, in nearly all cases the strikes will still all land in the same hit box. And really in the current meta, this is where the game is at. Long range engagements are the preferred fights currently so nothing really changes for most of us.

Brawlers on the other hand suffer terribly. Since with your system, the convergence would be the worst at point blank range, rendering many current light and medium brawler mechs nearly useless in one fell swoop. Smaller and Faster brawler mechs which can be an interesting alternative to the classic long range laser duels, would suddenly become quite worthless.

Implementing this idea of yours, would be very tragic. You have failed to provide a useful change in the current laser meta. and you would be nerfing most all brawler mechs in the process.

And perhaps worst of all, many players wouldn't even understand it. Instead of providing a useful game play change, you would instead be giving rise to a new swarm of angry players screaming about how their targeting reticle is broken. Rather than accurately indicating where a shot might land, it would suddenly become little more than a vague guideline of the general area you shot might land.

This is a terrible idea.

[Hotthedd]

DoctorZuber, on 25 April 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

It's an interesting idea, but largely irrelevant, unless you are a brawler . . .

Basically you are saying that beams should be fixed focus, and should always converge at some arbitrary point no matter what you aim at. Even if implemented like this, the net result is still going to remain very similar to what we currently have.

At max range, or near to max range, where the convergence is nearly a point, in nearly all cases the strikes will still all land in the same hit box. And really in the current meta, this is where the game is at. Long range engagements are the preferred fights currently so nothing really changes for most of us.

Brawlers on the other hand suffer terribly. Since with your system, the convergence would be the worst at point blank range, rendering many current light and medium brawler mechs nearly useless in one fell swoop. Smaller and Faster brawler mechs which can be an interesting alternative to the classic long range laser duels, would suddenly become quite worthless.

Implementing this idea of yours, would be very tragic. You have failed to provide a useful change in the current laser meta. and you would be nerfing most all brawler mechs in the process.

And perhaps worst of all, many players wouldn't even understand it. Instead of providing a useful game play change, you would instead be giving rise to a new swarm of angry players screaming about how their targeting reticle is broken. Rather than accurately indicating where a shot might land, it would suddenly become little more than a vague guideline of the general area you shot might land.

This is a terrible idea.

No. Face Huggers would have an issue with their shots not hitting the pinpoint.

BRAWLERS would likely have medium and shorter range weapons, and would therefore have an advantage over snipers. This could possibly open up more than one viable playstyle.

[Nightmare1]

I disagree; this convergence idea has as many holes in it as a block of Swiss Cheese, and will only serve to make the gameplay quality worse than what it is now.

[DoctorZuber]

As described by the OP, the focal point would be far, basically double the listed range of weapons or in other words, max range. This would be catastrophic to short range brawlers, or face huggers as you call them, and would not go unnoticed by medium range brawlers weakening them as well, if not as dramatically.

This would not open up more play styles. Long range already dominates, this change would only make it dominate even more.

Now other focal points, could be interesting to contemplate, such as the listed range i.e. the midpoint. This would effectively nerf everyone except mid range brawlers, including long range, but I still find the merits of such a change debatable at best.

In any event, changing how this works will anger players because suddenly, their shots don't hit the reticle, which is pretty silly for a laser really. The fact that lasers are DOT weapons is balance enough in my opinion, and gives a lot of weight to the instant damage of other weapons when used well. Lasers are easy to use. But are also the worst DPS of any weapons out there. If you have the skill to use other guns they are well worth considering.

Although the real reason lasers dominate the meta is because they have unlimited ammo. The longer matches of CW make this a very attractive proposition.

If you really want to shake things up, add an option to resupply ammo in CW instead. That would change everything.

Edited by DoctorZuber, 25 April 2015 - 03:38 PM.

[Hotthedd]

I definitely differentiate between face huggers and brawlers. A good brawler never face hugs.

Lets say you are a long range sniper and I am a brawler. Your weapons are set to converge at 1200m, mine at 450m. Before, closing in did not give me any real advantage, as your weapons still converge. It only evens the playing field because now I can hit you with my full force of weapons. Now, with set convergence, the brawler actually has an advantage over the sniper, as the sniper had the advantage at long range.

That is the point I was trying to make.

[Nightmare1]

Hotthedd, on 25 April 2015 - 04:40 PM, said:

I definitely differentiate between face huggers and brawlers. A good brawler never face hugs.

Lets say you are a long range sniper and I am a brawler. Your weapons are set to converge at 1200m, mine at 450m. Before, closing in did not give me any real advantage, as your weapons still converge. It only evens the playing field because now I can hit you with my full force of weapons. Now, with set convergence, the brawler actually has an advantage over the sniper, as the sniper had the advantage at long range.

That is the point I was trying to make.

So in other words, Snipers, already a rare and dying breed, shall perish from the face of this earth entirely.

[Hotthedd]

Nightmare1, on 25 April 2015 - 04:42 PM, said:

So in other words, Snipers, already a rare and dying breed, shall perish from the face of this earth entirely.

Why would that happen?

Snipers that are also brawlers would perish, perhaps. (Unless they brought a mix of weapons)

[Nightmare1]

You even admitted yourself that your system is biased towards brawlers. If brawlers have such an advantage, and snipers can't hit anything because of your convergence, then there is no reason for anyone to take a sniping Mech. Gauss is already rare on the field due to it's slow rate of fire and high crit chance. Add in your system and the one good feature, high amounts of accurate damage at range, goes out the window. Why even bother equipping it? Similar things can be said of PPCs.

In short, your system will just cater more to the laser vomit meta that currently exists, swinging the pendulum further in the direction of brawlers and LRM boats, the latter of which will not be affected by your convergence system.

[Stealth Fox]

DoctorZuber, on 25 April 2015 - 03:36 PM, said:

Although the real reason lasers dominate the meta is because they have unlimited ammo. The longer matches of CW make this a very attractive proposition.

If you really want to shake things up, add an option to resupply ammo in CW instead. That would change everything.

Also the fact clans really can not run anything else except for the Mad LRMer (Dog) and the Dakka Whale that no one uses in CW any how.

Though I do agree that rearm and repair points should be played with, give the map more reason to be played instead of the whole ignoring everything but the gens thing we have now.

[Hotthedd]

Nightmare1, on 25 April 2015 - 04:50 PM, said:

You even admitted yourself that your system is biased towards brawlers. If brawlers have such an advantage, and snipers can't hit anything because of your convergence, then there is no reason for anyone to take a sniping Mech. Gauss is already rare on the field due to it's slow rate of fire and high crit chance. Add in your system and the one good feature, high amounts of accurate damage at range, goes out the window. Why even bother equipping it? Similar things can be said of PPCs.

In short, your system will just cater more to the laser vomit meta that currently exists, swinging the pendulum further in the direction of brawlers and LRM boats, the latter of which will not be affected by your convergence system.

The current play style is biased toward long range PPFLD weapons.
Fixed convergence for multiple weapons being fired together (note: NOT for single shots) would make more that the one play style be viable. That's all.

[Nightmare1]

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

The current play style is biased toward long range PPFLD weapons.
Fixed convergence for multiple weapons being fired together (note: NOT for single shots) would make more that the one play style be viable. That's all.

I don't think that you and I are playing the same MWO, because what I am seeing is an awful lot of mid-range skirmishing using laser vomit. Long range combat using PPCs and Gauss is nearly dead except for two or three Mechs that are quirked specifically for that type of fighting (TDR-9S, HBK-GI).

In CW there is a bit more long range combat, but it still comes down to a mix of a couple long range snipers providing covering fire with the bulk of the attackers using fast brawlers. Even in this scenario, your method will just kill off those two or three snipers, but not do much about the brawlers.

Frankly speaking, I also don't think that we need convergence. With so many bugs in the game as it is, adding convergence simply entails an entirely new list of variables for things that can go wrong and break the game. Let PGI fix the problems that are already prevalent first before introducing new ones.

Lastly, with laser vomit being the current meta, there really isn't a rational reason for convergence. Laser weapons have no recoil, are generally light compared to other weapon types, and don't fire any projectiles. Thus, they should be able to be fired with extreme accuracy. Fight smarter, not harder if you want to increase your TTK against them rather than coming to the forums with a request that everyone be nerfed to accommodate you.

[BerserX]

I believe a better, more canonical solution to the issue of convergence would be to just make weapons fire straight ahead until you hit the "R" button to lock your target for close up (i.e.: inside 500m) targets. Your proposed solution would make this game more difficult to play for new players, while simply having to lock the target would make people fight smarter (ACTUALLY LOCK THE TARGET THEY"RE SHOOTING AT LIKE INTELLIGENT PLAYERS!!!) and add a more canonical sort of aspect to it (i.e.: weapons locking on targets in the BT books, not simply always aiming and squeezing the trigger).

I am opposed to either method - yours and my own - but I believe any convergence resolutions that occur should be canonically based.

[Stealth Fox]

BerserX, on 26 April 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

I believe a better, more canonical solution to the issue of convergence would be to just make weapons fire straight ahead until you hit the "R" button to lock your target for close up (i.e.: inside 500m) targets. Your proposed solution would make this game more difficult to play for new players, while simply having to lock the target would make people fight smarter (ACTUALLY LOCK THE TARGET THEY"RE SHOOTING AT LIKE INTELLIGENT PLAYERS!!!) and add a more canonical sort of aspect to it (i.e.: weapons locking on targets in the BT books, not simply always aiming and squeezing the trigger).

I am opposed to either method - yours and my own - but I believe any convergence resolutions that occur should be canonically based.

I'd be totally fine with convergence only working on those who lock onto things, would make a lot of other support classes lives easier and it would promote HOLDING YOUR DAMN LOCKS.

[Hotthedd]

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 09:43 AM, said:

I don't think that you and I are playing the same MWO, because what I am seeing is an awful lot of mid-range skirmishing using laser vomit. Long range combat using PPCs and Gauss is nearly dead except for two or three Mechs that are quirked specifically for that type of fighting (TDR-9S, HBK-GI).

In CW there is a bit more long range combat, but it still comes down to a mix of a couple long range snipers providing covering fire with the bulk of the attackers using fast brawlers. Even in this scenario, your method will just kill off those two or three snipers, but not do much about the brawlers.

Frankly speaking, I also don't think that we need convergence. With so many bugs in the game as it is, adding convergence simply entails an entirely new list of variables for things that can go wrong and break the game. Let PGI fix the problems that are already prevalent first before introducing new ones.

Lastly, with laser vomit being the current meta, there really isn't a rational reason for convergence. Laser weapons have no recoil, are generally light compared to other weapon types, and don't fire any projectiles. Thus, they should be able to be fired with extreme accuracy. Fight smarter, not harder if you want to increase your TTK against them rather than coming to the forums with a request that everyone be nerfed to accommodate you.

Accomodate ME?

Projection much?

It is not a matter of a laser coming out of a weapon accurately, it is a matter of the weapon being accurately aimed by the mech. So forget recoil, etc. Even a "light" weapon in BattleTech weighs TONS.

Snipers (I am guessing this is your preferred playstyle) have ZERO downside apart from Gauss Rifle snipers. ERPPCs, LLas, ERLLas, cERMLas, and cLPLs all do their max damage at range, AND up close. Instant magical pinpoint accuracy means that these builds have no consequence when fighting a brawler close up. Therefore, it has become the "meta" if you will. Call it laser vomit at long (and short) range.

Having to aim each weapon individually in order to acheive pinpoint accuracy might take more skill than you have, but I propose this system not to help ME, but the game overall by increasing TTK without convoluted mechanics, armor/ammo doubling, or superquirks.

[Nightmare1]

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Accomodate ME?

Projection much?

It is not a matter of a laser coming out of a weapon accurately, it is a matter of the weapon being accurately aimed by the mech. So forget recoil, etc. Even a "light" weapon in BattleTech weighs TONS.

...And so do real-life military weapon systems that still manage to strike targets with pinpoint accuracy. What's your point?

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Snipers (I am guessing this is your preferred playstyle) have ZERO downside apart from Gauss Rifle snipers. ERPPCs, LLas, ERLLas, cERMLas, and cLPLs all do their max damage at range, AND up close. Instant magical pinpoint accuracy means that these builds have no consequence when fighting a brawler close up. Therefore, it has become the "meta" if you will. Call it laser vomit at long (and short) range.

If you bothered to actually read any of my preceding posts, you would realize that I have said, several times, that I am a brawler. To put things in perspective, out of the 77 Mechs I own, only eight could be considered snipers. The rest are all brawlers or skirmishers.

What you fail to recognize is that these sniping weapons all have significant downsides. For example, the PPCs cannot deal damage within 90 meters and fire a relatively slow moving projectile that is not terribly hard to dodge at range. ERPPCs, are basically the same. Though they do not have the 90 meter limit their standard cousins have, they do have a substantially higher heat generation and Ghost Heat penalty, making them rather useless. Unless you are running a Mech quirked for ERPPCs, they are not worth taking. LLs are not a sniping weapon; they are a skirmishing and mid-range combat weapon. Clan weapons all have extended range over Inner Sphere. That is not a sniping issue so much as a technological advantage issue.

Generally, snipers have to use weapons with longer recycle times, higher heat generation, and slower moving projectiles than brawlers. There is a reason why they try to stay at range; getting too close to a non-sniper puts them at a serious disadvantage. I don't think you fully grasp this concept.

Furthermore, when you say that they do their "max damage at range," this is technically true for all weapons within their respective optimal ranges. At long range, they deal reduced to zero damage, scaling based on distance and weapon type. This is not unique to sniper weapons at all.

It appears to me that you are calling everything "sniping" if it hits you from beyond 300 meters. True sniping does not begin until at least twice that distance though. Anything between 300 and 600 meters could rightfully be considered skirmishing. Beyond 600 meters is where the snipers exist. Gauss Rifles, for example, have an optimal range of 660 meters. To get substantially closer puts their use at risk from fast moving enemy Mechs and skirmishers, so it is in his best interest to remain beyond 700 meters and snipe at range. That's not meta. Meta is fighting at about 400 meters with laser vomit. That's not sniping. Please refrain from making emotional posts without first considering the actual breakdown of MWO combat.

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Having to aim each weapon individually in order to acheive pinpoint accuracy might take more skill than you have, but I propose this system not to help ME, but the game overall by increasing TTK without convoluted mechanics, armor/ammo doubling, or superquirks.

It won't help the game at all. This system basically forces your weapons to fire behind your target. That's just flat out stupid and an offense to human intelligence. There is a reason why most people are voting "No" on the Poll.

On top of that, you already have to fire different weapon types independently of each other. Case in point, my AS7-S has four SRM 4s + Artemis, an AC/20, and four MLs. Unless my enemy is standing stock-still, I cannot fire all those weapons at once. Instead, to ensure that all my shots strike my target, I have to be able to lead with my AC/20 to score a hit, then alter the amount by which I am leading my target in order to strike with my SRMs, and then zero in with my crosshairs to hit with my MLs. In short, I have to make three separate sets of adjustments in order to accurately hit with three different types of weapon systems. I think that's reasonable. Being force to fire each system independently (as you and this system would like) of each other for a total of nine different adjustments is ludicrous. In fact, if forced to do that, I simply would stop running my Atlas entirely because it would not be worth the irritation. I would run Lights and Mediums almost exclusively, because the fewer weapon systems would allow for faster adjustment and firing.

Furthermore, the best way to improve your TTK is to fight smarter and not harder. Games only last fifteen minutes, max. Currently, most of mine last between eight and ten. That seems like a good measure to me. I don't necessarily want my matches to end on a "time-out" rather than a "No enemies left alive" condition. As far as TTK, so long as I don't do anything stupid, I tend to last to the end of the match. We don't need artificially induced, random inaccuracies in this game. It is nonsensical and does nothing to address the basic, underlying problem of player inadequacy or unwillingness to alter one's combat methods to adapt to a specific enemy or situation.

[Hotthedd]

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 02:07 PM, said:

...And so do real-life military weapon systems that still manage to strike targets with pinpoint accuracy. What's your point?

My point is that even in real-life, nothing fires MULTIPLE weapons simultaneously with pinpoint accuracy.
BUT, even without that, THIS is the BattleTech universe, not real real life. Perhaps you should get one?

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 02:07 PM, said:

(WALL of TEXT)

Please refrain from making emotional posts without first considering the actual breakdown of MWO combat.

(WALL of TEXT)

Furthermore, the best way to improve your TTK is to fight smarter and not harder. Games only last fifteen minutes, max. Currently, most of mine last between eight and ten. That seems like a good measure to me. I don't necessarily want my matches to end on a "time-out" rather than a "No enemies left alive" condition. As far as TTK, so long as I don't do anything stupid, I tend to last to the end of the match. We don't need artificially induced, random inaccuracies in this game. It is nonsensical and does nothing to address the basic, underlying problem of player inadequacy or unwillingness to alter one's combat methods to adapt to a specific enemy or situation.

Nothing I have argued has been emotional. That has been exclusively your domain.

As far as 'my' TTK, this is NOT about me. I do very well, TYVM. I am also not scared by the concept of having to aim each shot. You also seem to confuse TTK with surviving the match.

And, once again, I never said anything about random inaccuracies at all. I am really starting to believe you have no understanding of what the word "random" even means.

[Nightmare1]

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

My point is that even in real-life, nothing fires MULTIPLE weapons simultaneously with pinpoint accuracy.

Actually, there are, interestingly enough.

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

BUT, even without that, THIS is the BattleTech universe, not real real life. Perhaps you should get one?

I have one, thank you very much, which is one reason why I dislike the notion of convergence. It's an extra layer of complexity and an extra source of gameplay bugs that I simply do not want in my fictional life. I have little enough time as it is to play for fun.

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

Nothing I have argued has been emotional. That has been exclusively your domain.

Hmm...perhaps not, my apologies. The post I was referencing was made by another person that I thought had been you. That being said you certainly haven't been very analytic though.

Hotthedd, on 26 April 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

As far as 'my' TTK, this is NOT about me. I do very well, TYVM. I am also not scared by the concept of having to aim each shot. You also seem to confuse TTK with surviving the match.

And, once again, I never said anything about random inaccuracies at all. I am really starting to believe you have no understanding of what the word "random" even means.

If it is not about you, then I don't understand why you continue to post here. The polls are clearly indicating by a two-to-one margin that the community at large does not want this as detailed in the OP, and that the voters think it will cause more trouble than it is worth.

My "random" comment was an expansion to include convergence in general rather than simply this one notion set forth in the OP. Perhaps I worded that a bit clumsily. Still, the fact remains that convergence has no place in MWO in the game's current state.

Now, with all that being said, I think this topic has been beaten into the ground and that there is nothing left to be gained by discussing it further. Comments have been made, discussions held, and votes cast in such manner as a consensus, regarding the OP, has been attained. I am finished here.

Edited by Nightmare1, 26 April 2015 - 04:09 PM.