32 replies to this topic

[Hotthedd]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

All of my mechs take time to torso twist and converge. Not much, but it's not instant. What you want is already in the game.

What I want is definitely NOT in this game.

And your torso weapons are always, 100% converged with each other, no matter how many you have, they all aim for ONE crosshair. Converging with the arm weapons (without arm lock) is on the pilot.

[Savage Wolf]

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 08:40 AM, said:

What I want is definitely NOT in this game.

And your torso weapons are always, 100% converged with each other, no matter how many you have, they all aim for ONE crosshair. Converging with the arm weapons (without arm lock) is on the pilot.

You are thinking about this backwards. The weapons are not converging on the crosshair, the crosshair simply indicates where they are currently converged at. The same with the arms. That's why when you torse twist that everything needs a little time to catch up.

And why would the number of weapons make any difference? Why wouldn't they all just be synced at all times? What would be the benefit of not doing that?

Other games have bloom to indicate that the weapon is not 100% accurate, it has nothing to do with convergence. We could have the same with some weapons in MWO, but that would make most sense with ACs that already has travel time decreasing their accuracy and then you would have bloom with even a single weapon.

[Hotthedd]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 08:56 AM, said:

You are thinking about this backwards. The weapons are not converging on the crosshair, the crosshair simply indicates where they are currently converged at. The same with the arms. That's why when you torse twist that everything needs a little time to catch up.

And why would the number of weapons make any difference? Why wouldn't they all just be synced at all times? What would be the benefit of not doing that?

Other games have bloom to indicate that the weapon is not 100% accurate, it has nothing to do with convergence. We could have the same with some weapons in MWO, but that would make most sense with ACs that already has travel time decreasing their accuracy and then you would have bloom with even a single weapon.

And since the crosshair is pinpoint, the weapons are converged on that point.

The reason it doesn't make sense is due to the fact that this was not feasible in the BattleTech universe. It is the very reason each shot in TT was "rolled" determining hit location, or if each weapon hit at all.
In MW:O, all torso weapons (if the same weapon) will all hit (or miss) the same spot. Same with the arms. THAT is the definition of convergence.

[Savage Wolf]

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 09:27 AM, said:

And since the crosshair is pinpoint, the weapons are converged on that point.

That's kind of how crosshairs are supposed to work. And so are many weapons except for those with spread. But is that what you want changed? The weapon pinpoints?

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 09:27 AM, said:

The reason it doesn't make sense is due to the fact that this was not feasible in the BattleTech universe. It is the very reason each shot in TT was "rolled" determining hit location, or if each weapon hit at all.
In MW:O, all torso weapons (if the same weapon) will all hit (or miss) the same spot. Same with the arms. THAT is the definition of convergence.

So because of the game mechanics of the table top game we should change a shooter to emulate that inaccuracy despite it making no sense at all in a shooter. And we should just expect all those new players that have never heard of the table top to understand this or do we need to introduce them to the table top game first?
And why is it not feasable in the battletech universe? Have all technicians in the universe decided that pilots needed an extra challenge and so they intentionally made all the weapons inaccurate? It does not require year 3025 tech to converge weapons, we can already do that perfectly today.

[Hotthedd]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

That's kind of how crosshairs are supposed to work. And so are many weapons except for those with spread. But is that what you want changed? The weapon pinpoints?

For me, only for the firing of multiple weapons, or a set distance convergence

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

So because of the game mechanics of the table top game we should change a shooter to emulate that inaccuracy despite it making no sense at all in a shooter. And we should just expect all those new players that have never heard of the table top to understand this or do we need to introduce them to the table top game first?
And why is it not feasable in the battletech universe? Have all technicians in the universe decided that pilots needed an extra challenge and so they intentionally made all the weapons inaccurate? It does not require year 3025 tech to converge weapons, we can already do that perfectly today.

Well...yes. This game was supposed to be more of a sim. A "thinking persons' shooter". New players do not need TT, but ideally they would be familiarized with the BattleTech universe in a tutorial before jumping into the Lion's Den.
The technicians that were really good either fled the Inner sphere 300 years ago, or were killed during the constant war that has followed. Technical data, construction methods and plans, and caches of weapons have all been plundered and destroyed. Sometimes this "Lostech" is discovered, and new upgrades become available by being reverse engineered. 3050 is the Bronze Age compared to 2750.

Imagine the movie 'Idiocracy', but with giant stompy walking tanks.

[Savage Wolf]

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

For me, only for the firing of multiple weapons, or a set distance convergence

Why would the amount of weapons have any affect upon convergence and why would you willingly design a mech with a set distance in convergence.

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

Well...yes. This game was supposed to be more of a sim. A "thinking persons' shooter".

What has this anything to do with thinking? It's not smart, it does require you to be smart to use it, you need reflexes or coordination. It doesn't add strategy or tactics or smart moves. It just makes aiming harder.

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

New players do not need TT, but ideally they would be familiarized with the BattleTech universe in a tutorial before jumping into the Lion's Den.

Yes, the overall story of battletech, sure. But lets leave all the quirks and mechanics of TT behind if they aren't relevant in a shooter.

Hotthedd, on 08 August 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

The technicians that were really good either fled the Inner sphere 300 years ago, or were killed during the constant war that has followed. Technical data, construction methods and plans, and caches of weapons have all been plundered and destroyed. Sometimes this "Lostech" is discovered, and new upgrades become available by being reverse engineered. 3050 is the Bronze Age compared to 2750.

Yes yes, I know this part of the lore and it such lazy writing. If there was still mechs left, there would also have been records of the technology readily available in libraries or enough of the science it was based on to quickly reverse engineer. So soon after they would have educated enough new technicians to build new mechs.
And in those years they make plenty of new mechs so they clearly still knew how to make a mech shoot it's weapons where you aimed them at. It's not even rocket science today, why would it suddenly be in the future?
And it's not like the Clans aimed any differently. So LosTech has nothing to do with it.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

MOBAs aren't complex, but they have lots of depth. It's easy to play the game but there is huge potential for mastering which, granted, becomes increasingly complex. But anyone can pick up the game and play the game with some success and knows what's going on.

Making it harder to hit your intended target just increases the barrier to entry without adding any depth. We already have plenty of projectiles that aren't instant that adds complexity, but also depth to the game. We don't need needless complexity to scare players away and leave it for the few who some reason likes to do the same thing, just harder.

You can't just download a MOBA and go right into multiplayer matches straight away and expect any kind of success either, even if you're familiar with controlling a character in in the RTS style with the RMB. Controlling your character may be simple in the mechanical sense, but everything else related to the game is stupid complex. Success in those games requires you to be familiar with the role and abilities of every character in the game, how they synergize with other characters, and how items can affect their abilities.

Also, it's not that goddamn complex. You move fast, you shoot bad. You move slower, you shoot better. You stop moving, you shoot best. Some guns and mechs are more accurate on the move than others. That's practically every FPS released in the past 10 years. The only difference is that you're using multiple guns at once and each one has a distinct (and identifiable, if they do it right) crosshair.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

And I don't get the immersive factor either. Who the hell builds giant war machines that can't shoot straight?

It's one of the game mechanics from the old tabletop game that never crossed over to the PC games. Hitting things was hard, and landing every shot from every weapon on one component was practically impossible. Nothing in Battletech actually makes any kind of damn sense, so trying to apply logic to the lore is a fool's errand. I'm not one of those neckbeardy lore types, but this is a mechanic that would make sense to translate over.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

All of my mechs take time to torso twist and converge. Not much, but it's not instant. What you want is already in the game.

We're not talking about torso twist, but the speed at which your weapons converge on whatever you point at. It used to not be instant, hence the currently useless Pinpoint elite skill. Now it's instant. It should not be.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

Yes yes, I know this part of the lore and it such lazy writing. If there was still mechs left, there would also have been records of the technology readily available in libraries or enough of the science it was based on to quickly reverse engineer. So soon after they would have educated enough new technicians to build new mechs.
And in those years they make plenty of new mechs so they clearly still knew how to make a mech shoot it's weapons where you aimed them at. It's not even rocket science today, why would it suddenly be in the future?
And it's not like the Clans aimed any differently. So LosTech has nothing to do with it.

LosTech is the only reason battlemechs exist. Otherwise, you'd just send cruise missiles and call it a day. Please stop trying to apply logic to Battletech.

[Savage Wolf]

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

You can't just download a MOBA and go right into multiplayer matches straight away and expect any kind of success either, even if you're familiar with controlling a character in in the RTS style with the RMB. Controlling your character may be simple in the mechanical sense, but everything else related to the game is stupid complex. Success in those games requires you to be familiar with the role and abilities of every character in the game, how they synergize with other characters, and how items can affect their abilities.

I did exactly that. Just downloaded the game and started playing. It is super simple to figure out. Of course as you want to progress in the game you need to learn these things, but not from the very beginning. Not until you are level 30 and want to play ranked.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

Also, it's not that goddamn complex. You move fast, you shoot bad. You move slower, you shoot better. You stop moving, you shoot best. Some guns and mechs are more accurate on the move than others. That's practically every FPS released in the past 10 years. The only difference is that you're using multiple guns at once and each one has a distinct (and identifiable, if they do it right) crosshair.

Other FPS games don't have convergence because you have one gun shooting from straight from your middle. It's constantly converged. The weapons however might be inaccurate and thus have an arc of fire instead of being pinpoint, but that is a different mechanic altogether.
We could possibly add that to ACs, Gauss and PPCs, but then we should also make them instantanious or greatly reduced travel time.
Moving an shooting is only inaccurate as infantry because you need your body to stay steady. But a mech is obviously built to compensate just like any other mounted weapons we use.
In short, you cannot compare this to any other shooter because no other shooter actually needs convergence.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

It's one of the game mechanics from the old tabletop game that never crossed over to the PC games. Hitting things was hard, and landing every shot from every weapon on one component was practically impossible. Nothing in Battletech actually makes any kind of damn sense, so trying to apply logic to the lore is a fool's errand. I'm not one of those neckbeardy lore types, but this is a mechanic that would make sense to translate over.

Why does it make sense to translate this over? I don't get it. How does that improve the gameplay of the game in any way? How does hitting random components make any sense in a shooter? If we need to make it harder to hit accurately in a shooter game, use shooter mechanics, not dice mechanics.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

We're not talking about torso twist, but the speed at which your weapons converge on whatever you point at. It used to not be instant, hence the currently useless Pinpoint elite skill. Now it's instant. It should not be.

Just think of it as that now the crosshair is not an indication of what you want to point at, but what you are pointing at.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

I did exactly that. Just downloaded the game and started playing. It is super simple to figure out. Of course as you want to progress in the game you need to learn these things, but not from the very beginning. Not until you are level 30 and want to play ranked.

MOBAs have decent in-game tutorials. No part of controlling a mech in MWO couldn't be adequately taught with a decent tutorial, which MWO doesn't have. What part of adding this system would make MWO insurmountably difficult for new players to learn?

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Other FPS games don't have convergence because you have one gun shooting from straight from your middle. It's constantly converged. The weapons however might be inaccurate and thus have an arc of fire instead of being pinpoint, but that is a different mechanic altogether.
We could possibly add that to ACs, Gauss and PPCs, but then we should also make them instantanious or greatly reduced travel time.

Moving an shooting is only inaccurate as infantry because you need your body to stay steady. But a mech is obviously built to compensate just like any other mounted weapons we use.
In short, you cannot compare this to any other shooter because no other shooter actually needs convergence.

It's completely irrelevant how many guns you use in other shooters. The principle is the same. Move fast, shoot bad. Move slow, shoot better. Don't move, shoot best.

And again, applying real world logic to Battletech is stupid. There's no real world comparison, as we have not successfully built any kind of giant combat robot. Wee probably never will, since they're inherently illogical. And besides, a battlemech is practically a giant human body in terms of movement mechanics, anyway. It's even controlled by myomers, which are basically synthetic muscles. These muscles lose strength and precision when they overheat, which is why mechs get movement and accuracy penalties as they heat up in tabletop.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Why does it make sense to translate this over? I don't get it. How does that improve the gameplay of the game in any way? How does hitting random components make any sense in a shooter? If we need to make it harder to hit accurately in a shooter game, use shooter mechanics, not dice mechanics.

It reduces TTK and gives us a reason not to be running at full speed everywhere at all times. And dice mechanics are exactly what most shooters do. If you do any kind of moving and shooting, it essentially does become a dice roll whether or not you what you're pointing at, even your target is dead center to your reticle. The difference here is that if you assign a crosshair to each weapon, you get to see exactly where your shots will go, even if they're not going exactly where you want them to go.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

Just think of it as that now the crosshair is not an indication of what you want to point at, but what you are pointing at.

That's exactly what I want it to be. Multiple reticles indicating what all my weapons are pointing at, all converging (via arm movements or gimbal mounts on torso hardpoints) towards the thing under my main reticle that I want dead.

[Savage Wolf]

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 12:17 PM, said:

LosTech is the only reason battlemechs exist. Otherwise, you'd just send cruise missiles and call it a day. Please stop trying to apply logic to Battletech.

A game needs to stay true to it's own logic which is what I used. But the LosTech explanation for bad weapon convergence contradicts with itself. No use of real world logic needed to debunk that.
And if logic doesn't apply then why have bad weapon convergence? You must still have a reason. I don't care if it's real world logic, game logic or something else, as long as it adds up and gives a better experience.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

MOBAs have decent in-game tutorials. No part of controlling a mech in MWO couldn't be adequately taught with a decent tutorial, which MWO doesn't have. What part of adding this system would make MWO insurmountably difficult for new players to learn?

I didn't even use the tutorial in LOL. It was all obvious. And right now piloting a mech is mostly difficult because mechs move as tanks and not as people, but a tutorial can teach that quickly. Convergence however is unintuitive and just a needless complexity that would take time to get your head around. For a long time in closed beta I just thought I was a lousy shot until people on the forum mentioned convergence and then I figured out why I never hit where I was aiming.
Configuring mechs however, now that is a text book example of how to confuse and scare people away with needless complexity, but that's another topic.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

It's completely irrelevant how many guns you use in other shooters. The principle is the same. Move fast, shoot bad. Move slow, shoot better. Don't move, shoot best.

That's still accuracy and nothing to do with convergence. The main gun of a tank always hits exactly where it was pointing at all times, at all speeds because that one gun is simply pointing straight at the crosshair. You only need convergence if you have more than one weapons because they cannot all be exactly in the middle and therefore needs to shoot at an angle. That's why there is no other FPS games to compare to.
And moving has no effect on convergence. What does effect convergence is if the distance between the mech and the point that they are aiming at changes. And changes faster than the weapons can adjust which needs to be pretty damn fast.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

And again, applying real world logic to Battletech is stupid. There's no real world comparison, as we have not successfully built any kind of giant combat robot. Wee probably never will, since they're inherently illogical. And besides, a battlemech is practically a giant human body in terms of movement mechanics, anyway. It's even controlled by myomers, which are basically synthetic muscles. These muscles lose strength and precision when they overheat, which is why mechs get movement and accuracy penalties as they heat up in tabletop.

Convergence is a real world thing with associated physics and was exactly what they tried to emulate in closed beta. So as long as we talk convergence we are already talking real world logic. When we are talking mechs we are talking imaginary technology, but with the same purpose as all other warmachinery. Why imagine cool mechs and then imagine them purposefully poorly made for no reason. I want military mechs, not mechs made by a tech student that doesn't know what he's doing.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

It reduces TTK and gives us a reason not to be running at full speed everywhere at all times. And dice mechanics are exactly what most shooters do. If you do any kind of moving and shooting, it essentially does become a dice roll whether or not you what you're pointing at, even your target is dead center to your reticle. The difference here is that if you assign a crosshair to each weapon, you get to see exactly where your shots will go, even if they're not going exactly where you want them to go.

That is not even CLOSE to what TT did. TT did not have convergence, TT had random hit locations. What you are suggesting here is simply inaccuracy, an entirely different mechanic from convergence. And I do agree that we might need to reduce TTK and inaccuracy could be one of those things.
But really, we cannot in any meaningful way simulate the aiming mechanics of TT so maybe we shouldn't try to simulate it's armor system either. That's another way we could go. As long as it adds to the game and isn't just confusing.

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

That's exactly what I want it to be. Multiple reticles indicating what all my weapons are pointing at, all converging (via arm movements or gimbal mounts on torso hardpoints) towards the thing under my main reticle that I want dead.

Which is exactly what you currently have. They just happen to be synced up all the time because you can't torso twist faster than the convergence can adjust anyway. Except for arms which can move faster and at greater angles.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

A game needs to stay true to it's own logic which is what I used. But the LosTech explanation for bad weapon convergence contradicts with itself. No use of real world logic needed to debunk that.
And if logic doesn't apply then why have bad weapon convergence? You must still have a reason. I don't care if it's real world logic, game logic or something else, as long as it adds up and gives a better experience.

I'm not sure you're at all familiar with the BattleTech lore. The tabletop game used dice roll for hit locations because mechs had a hell of a time just hitting another mech, let alone targeting specific components or ensuring all of its weapons hit the same component. Perfect instant convergence is inconsistent with setting's lore.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

I didn't even use the tutorial in LOL. It was all obvious. And right now piloting a mech is mostly difficult because mechs move as tanks and not as people, but a tutorial can teach that quickly. Convergence however is unintuitive and just a needless complexity that would take time to get your head around. For a long time in closed beta I just thought I was a lousy shot until people on the forum mentioned convergence and then I figured out why I never hit where I was aiming.
Configuring mechs however, now that is a text book example of how to confuse and scare people away with needless complexity, but that's another topic.

What is it about delayed convergence makes it impossible for a tutorial to teach? You thought it was confusing back in CB because there wasn't a tutorial. If there was a tutorial that teaches it, then it wouldn't be confusing now, would it?

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

That's still accuracy and nothing to do with convergence. The main gun of a tank always hits exactly where it was pointing at all times, at all speeds because that one gun is simply pointing straight at the crosshair. You only need convergence if you have more than one weapons because they cannot all be exactly in the middle and therefore needs to shoot at an angle. That's why there is no other FPS games to compare to.
And moving has no effect on convergence. What does effect convergence is if the distance between the mech and the point that they are aiming at changes. And changes faster than the weapons can adjust which needs to be pretty damn fast.

Sure, if you want to be pedantic. Movement should affect accuracy. Fine.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

Convergence is a real world thing with associated physics and was exactly what they tried to emulate in closed beta. So as long as we talk convergence we are already talking real world logic. When we are talking mechs we are talking imaginary technology, but with the same purpose as all other warmachinery. Why imagine cool mechs and then imagine them purposefully poorly made for no reason. I want military mechs, not mechs made by a tech student that doesn't know what he's doing.

Do you know nothing of Battletech? This is a universe where 1000 meters is "long range" for a missile, and short range missiles just explode the moment they reach 270 meters for no goddamn reason. This is a universe where cannon ranges get shorter the more powerful they get, and lasers have a maximum range for some reason. This is a universe where a battlemech is somehow more powerful than a tank with equivalent tonnage. Seriously, the only conceivable advantage a battlemech would have over a tank built with the same technologies is the ability to step over inclines. A tank would be better at literally everything else. Mech's are inherently illogical,so trying to apply logic to this nonsense is stupid.

Most of the mechs designs we have in game are hundreds of years old because people didn't know how to make new ones. They knew enough to keep the factories going.

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

That is not even CLOSE to what TT did. TT did not have convergence, TT had random hit locations. What you are suggesting here is simply inaccuracy, an entirely different mechanic from convergence. And I do agree that we might need to reduce TTK and inaccuracy could be one of those things.
But really, we cannot in any meaningful way simulate the aiming mechanics of TT so maybe we shouldn't try to simulate it's armor system either. That's another way we could go. As long as it adds to the game and isn't just confusing.

You can aim shots in TT. You needed a targeting computer to do it, or you can aim shots at immobile mechs. Obviously we're not going to require Clan exclusive tech to allow basic Mechwarrior tactics like "aiming for the legs".

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

Which is exactly what you currently have. They just happen to be synced up all the time because you can't torso twist faster than the convergence can adjust anyway. Except for arms which can move faster and at greater angles.

Convergence isn't the same as torso twist speed. What you're talking about is a delay between your pilot's head looking at something and your mech's arms and torso turning to face it.

[Savage Wolf]

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

I'm not sure you're at all familiar with the BattleTech lore. The tabletop game used dice roll for hit locations because mechs had a hell of a time just hitting another mech, let alone targeting specific components or ensuring all of its weapons hit the same component. Perfect instant convergence is inconsistent with setting's lore.

No, the lore described the dice mechanics, not the other way around. And the lore did not describe that when the distance between target and attacker changed that it became harder to hit. So their inability to pinpoint damage wasn't convergence, maybe inaccuracy. The lore hardly mentions convergence at all. I can only think of it being used to justify minimum ranges on weapons. And those were not about the speed on convergence, but the limit of convergence, which is in the game.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

What is it about delayed convergence makes it impossible for a tutorial to teach? You thought it was confusing back in CB because there wasn't a tutorial. If there was a tutorial that teaches it, then it wouldn't be confusing now, would it?

It would help tell the player that no, you are not bad at aiming, the controls are just bad. So now you are no longer confused about why your shots are flying everywhere, not you are just frustrated that you have to put up with it to make the mech do as you want.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Sure, if you want to be pedantic. Movement should affect accuracy. Fine.

Which it already quite naturally does. One can just get better at compensating. No need to simulate an effect that is actually there.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Do you know nothing of Battletech? This is a universe where 1000 meters is "long range" for a missile, and short range missiles just explode the moment they reach 270 meters for no goddamn reason. This is a universe where cannon ranges get shorter the more powerful they get, and lasers have a maximum range for some reason. This is a universe where a battlemech is somehow more powerful than a tank with equivalent tonnage. Seriously, the only conceivable advantage a battlemech would have over a tank built with the same technologies is the ability to step over inclines. A tank would be better at literally everything else. Mech's are inherently illogical,so trying to apply logic to this nonsense is stupid.

Yeah, but the illogical nature of the mechs is not an invitation to add more illogical stuff just for the hell of it. I'm fine with some illogical nonsense if it is cool or balances the game, adds to the gameplay or things like that. But I see none of that with non-instant convergence.
Snipers just need to be little more patient before getting their pinpoint alphas off and why the extra penalty while moving? Are brawlers OP? All it will change is that controls are more frustrating. The game balance remains or is worsened.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Most of the mechs designs we have in game are hundreds of years old because people didn't know how to make new ones. They knew enough to keep the factories going.

But even those hundred year old mechs used the same targeting systems.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

You can aim shots in TT. You needed a targeting computer to do it, or you can aim shots at immobile mechs. Obviously we're not going to require Clan exclusive tech to allow basic Mechwarrior tactics like "aiming for the legs".

So lets use lore to justify this one thing, but not this other thing.

Kaeb Odellas, on 09 August 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

Convergence isn't the same as torso twist speed. What you're talking about is a delay between your pilot's head looking at something and your mech's arms and torso turning to face it.

Didn't say it was. I said that the convergence speed was faster than your torso twist speed. So you are always fully converged. Unless your target somehow changed from 1000m distance to 10m distance, then it might take a few milliseconds to converge. Also funny how the speed of my head turning is affected by chassis and engine size. Oh wait, no it's torso twist speed.