98 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 09:53 PM, said:

Where have you been? Analog turning has been around since at least March 2013.

I don't own a joystick, so, yeah.

But I've been thinking of a throttle-mouse setup, but with analog turning, I'll need to consider that more carefully. May be better to use a joystick in my left hand instead of a throttle, unless there are throttle controls with two axis?

Hmm.

[Mystere]

Wintersdark, on 03 February 2016 - 09:59 PM, said:

I don't own a joystick, so, yeah.

But I've been thinking of a throttle-mouse setup, but with analog turning, I'll need to consider that more carefully. May be better to use a joystick in my left hand instead of a throttle, unless there are throttle controls with two axis?

Hmm.

The Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog throttle has four (). But, only the mouse thingy on the right half of the throttle stick makes sense to use for analog turning, at least for me anyway, and requires a really light touch.

Now if only PGI removes that forced dead zone on the joystick itself.

In a related note, I'm looking at this. It has 4 analog axes.

[Wintersdark]

Hmmm, I was looking at the Thrustmaster T-Flight hotas, turns out the buttons I was going to use to turn (digitally) are actually an analogue rocker that reports as an axis. That's sweet, so my cunning plan can continue.

Also, its cheap, which is important

[Mystere]

DeadEye COTP, on 03 February 2016 - 05:51 PM, said:

Some people aren't fans of RNG systems, but I think it would do wonders for the game. Having a chance your mech will shut down after a certain amount of heat and not just while over 100%, chance of weapons being destroyed, ammo explosions and the like.

That is because when someone says "random", the knee jerk thought that enters most people's minds is "even random distribution" when in fact what is being referred to is "gaussian random distribution". It really helps to know the difference.

Heck, a convergence thread just went to the birds less than an hour ago simply because the idea of "random" entered someone's mind and probably went postal (I assume anyway because the thread disappeared as I was responding).

Edited by Mystere, 03 February 2016 - 10:18 PM.

[Mystere]

Wintersdark, on 03 February 2016 - 10:13 PM, said:

Hmmm, I was looking at the Thrustmaster T-Flight hotas, turns out the buttons I was going to use to turn (digitally) are actually an analogue rocker that reports as an axis. That's sweet, so my cunning plan can continue.

Also, its cheap, which is important

Before you get that T-Flight, you might want to first look at the T-16000M. It uses hall-effect sensors for better sensitivity and resolution. The stick also twists in addition to the usual X and Y axes. It's also ambidextrous, so you can use a dual joystick setup if you're into that.

Edited by Mystere, 03 February 2016 - 10:25 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

FupDup, on 02 February 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

That's not true at all. All MW games have had sub-par poopy weapons, and sometimes it has been the same weapons that keep ending up in that state. Likewise, there have also always been certain weapons that are better than them, like the Gauss or ERLL.

I'm not disagreeing that most weapons aren't competing well against lasers, I'm just pointing out that the older MW games weren't flawlessly balanced.

and way more weapons lol

[Lozruet Gravemind]

AztecD, on 03 February 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

have lasers work full damage until effective range, no additional damage after that, that's why ERLL is used, you can boat a couple and "paint" your target from extreme ranges, in BT most of the weapons came under 1000mts with some exceptions like ERPPC's or ATM's

Cone of Fire also would be fine, but we can only dream

Yes but there was also the optional rules in BT of the Extreme Range of weapons. Where you penalty to hit was a +6 if I do remember. PGI basically duplicated that by reducing damage since they really cant control how well players aim.

[Wintersdark]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 10:24 PM, said:

Before you get that T-Flight, you might want to first look at the T-16000M. It uses hall-effect sensors for better sensitivity and resolution. The stick also twists in addition to the usual X and Y axes. It's also ambidextrous, so you can use a dual joystick setup if you're into that.

I'm not sure my brain will work correctly with an x asis on my left hand. Throttle (forward and backwards) absolutely (I drive vehicles like that daily), and twist or some such for turning, probably... But as a full joystick, I fear my extreme right handedness will result in accidental turning. Hmm.

On the other hand, I do want a joystick for flight sims, so even if it doesn't work out as a throttle, I can just buy a throttle separately after too.

[mogs01gt]

Lugh, on 03 February 2016 - 01:35 PM, said:

Funny but when I left the comp scene at the height of the NERF PPCS, NERF GAUSS NERF JJs poptarts now stage a year and a half ago. ALL the Comp teams were running ER-PPC x2 Plus Gauss.

That was two years ago and why are you talking about a meta from 2 years back?? We are talking about right now! At least I know not to take you seriously....

[Lugh]

mogs01gt, on 04 February 2016 - 05:16 AM, said:

That was two years ago and why are you talking about a meta from 2 years back?? We are talking about right now! At least I know not to take you seriously....

Because sonny, without that history, you don't understand why the laser cry babies got their way. And you won't understand when the Meta shift start going back there (it's already heading that way now with a healthy peppering of LRMs to boot). But go ahead stay stuck IN THE BOX.

[adamts01]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

In a related note, I'm looking at this. It has 4 analog axes.

That thing looks cool. I'm like a learning disabled monkey when it comes to using a keyboard for walking around in shooters. Somehow MWO works for me, but every other game I need to use a gamepad. The Steam controller seemed like my only hope for not being useless in a shooter but it still can't be as good as a mouse. This thing might be the ticket.

Edit: I'm sitting here moving my feet around at my desk like an idiot imagining what it would be like moving around with that thing and remembered I can't lift my left foot.... That might be a problem... I can push down with it but the muscle that lifts up had to get cut out...

Edited by adamts01, 04 February 2016 - 05:30 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 10:13 PM, said:

That is because when someone says "random", the knee jerk thought that enters most people's minds is "even random distribution" when in fact what is being referred to is "gaussian random distribution". It really helps to know the difference.

Heck, a convergence thread just went to the birds less than an hour ago simply because the idea of "random" entered someone's mind and probably went postal (I assume anyway because the thread disappeared as I was responding).

Removing convergence just means fixed weapons that fire straight forward. The only exception might be arm weapons. Give those low mounts a plus of sorts...

[Reitrix]

I've been out of the game for long while, But I'm pretty sure the popularity of the laservomit has more to do with them being Hitscan and deal several points of damage on that instant contact before burning the extra damage if kept on target.

IIRC, 4 MLs fired together will deal 5~ damage on 'impact'.
IMO they should just change the way lasers deal damage so they can't deal solid damage on contact.
No changes to burn times or actual damage, just the mechanic behind the DoT effect.

[wanderer]

Heck, they don't even need to remove convergence. They just need to not make weapons converge at precisely the target's range, thereby allowing the worst-case result of being able to nail a target with every gun on the same pixel, never mind the same section, even at 1000+m shots.

Quote

deal several points of damage on that instant contact

Also, lasers are full DOT. The damage is split evenly across the burn time, but shorter burn times and the ability to stack lots of DOT on one point (and keep it on target easily) is potent.

Seriously. The meta has always been about putting as much damage into one spot as fast as possible, and balance really is going to come from altering how easy that mechanic is, far more than juggling weapon stats.

[AztecD]

weapons should converge, but not instantly, BT3025 had it right, you "lock" on your enemy and on gold, your weapons would converge on target, but it was not instant, and depending on the weapon it took different times.

i mean its like aiming a tank, its not immediate

Edited by AztecD, 04 February 2016 - 06:55 PM.

[brroleg]

Lightfoot, on 02 February 2016 - 02:20 PM, said:

I go into Mechlab and build interesting mechs, but there is really no point in using anything but a laser-boat in MWO. The rest of the weapons are just fluff to support massed lasers. MWO long range is dominated by ER large lasers. Short range is dominated by medium lasers.

Previous MechWarrior games had the whole arsenal competitive and dangerous. Not having that in MWO is a great loss of game depth. The other weapons need greater tactical strength so they beat lasers if used at the right range or right terrain. I think if the other weapons lack those qualities lasers will just be the best weapon for any circumstance and we will lose all that MechWarrior gameplay depth that Mechlab can bring. That's all.







.

This is how you can change this game to not being laser-warrior http://mwomercs.com/...into-ap-and-he/

All other ways will just change the game to being autocannon-warrior or missile-warrior or whatever weapons they will buff to dimmer down lasers. Buffs and nerfs will not solve anything.

[Mystere]

AztecD, on 04 February 2016 - 06:25 PM, said:

weapons should converge, but not instantly, BT3025 had it right, you "lock" on your enemy and on gold, your weapons would converge on target, but it was not instant, and depending on the weapon it took different times.

i mean its like aiming a tank, its not immediate

The problem is that according to PGI that slow convergence is what tripped up HSR or something, which is why we no longer have it.

Edited by Mystere, 04 February 2016 - 09:11 PM.

[wanderer]

Yeah. Convergence states basically have to be instant and relatively simple- a "locked" and "unlocked" state is definitely possible, but a gradual convergence change wouldn't work with HSR.

[PyckenZot]

thehiddenedge, on 03 February 2016 - 07:13 AM, said:

It's not so much Lasers as it is all the weapons converging into one spot instantly. If we had a gradual convergence and better convergence for locked targets vs unlocked targets it would help belay the snap shooting alphas we see so much currently. If you lower the heat cap(something which I am greatly in favor of) you would then just see a shift toward ballistic and laser pinpoint builds instead of pure laser alphas like we have now.

As much as I hate it in actual FPS's, weapon sway and cones of fire actually make much more sense for a lumbering battlemech which relies on targeting computers to aim the weapons while moving. If we had more "unlucky misses" we would see less alpha spamming and more use of smaller weapon groups and more shots taken. Think of the movement penalties to accuracy that most games already use. It makes much more sense for a walking tank that shakes violently with each step.

Agreeing with the convergence delay. Not the cones of fire. I know I used to defend the latter, but that was when I was still in my WoT detox period. There should be no such thing as "unlucky" misses. However, having to face the enemy for awhile prior to being able to singlepannel alpha him is a good solution and might actually bring some more BT feel to the game. The major issue I see with that solution however is lights. Try killing spiders and other arctic cheetas when all your fire nicely shoots around them,...

Edited by PyckenZot, 05 February 2016 - 02:09 AM.