141 replies to this topic

[Tarogato]

Khobai, on 07 February 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

arm lock does need two changes:

first, arm lock should NOT center the arm reticle on the torso reticle faster than you can do it manually. arm lock needs to be slowed down a little. players are abusing arm lock to be able to move their arms faster than they should be able to go, that abuse needs to be prevented by slowing down the speed armlock takes to return to the center (make armlock take at least a half second longer to return to center instead of being near instant).

Actually you have this backward. Right now having armlock ON currently slows down your torso rotation. Having arms free, or rather armlock OFF allows you to torso twist faster. This is why I play with armlock off and I almost never even touch my armlock toggle.

From my reddit post:

> Yes. Enabling armlock makes your torso twist slower. Do not listen to the other replies in this thread,
> they are wrong because they haven't actually tested this. I have tested this.

> How to test this: hop in an Urbie. Do a predetermined number of full rotations (like... 10) with
> armlock enabled. You'll need some way to do a continuous torso twist (such as a joystick input -
> I use a TrackPoint clitmouse) and have the sensitivity as high as it will go so that there is no possibility
> of human error. Note the amount of time that it takes to complete the full number of rotations. Then
> repeat the process with armlock disabled - it will be a much shorter amount of time - by about 30% if
> my memory serves.

> People are easily misled by the camera panning by thinking it is a placebo effect. And while there is
> placebo effect, there is additionally a demonstrable difference in rotation speed. You'll notice the
> difference on your compass and minimap if you have a keen eye, as these are not affected by the
> camera panning. Another thing to notice is that every mech's engine makes a whine when you torso
> twist - the whine is higher-pitched with armlock disabled... because you are actually turning faster.


I just dug up the numbers from when I ran the test, arms-free was calculated to be 21% faster. In an Urbie with 120 engine, it took me 48 seconds to do 10 full rotations with armlock, and 38 seconds with arms free.

Edited by Tarogato, 07 February 2016 - 03:51 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarogato, on 07 February 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

If it's so bad for Banshees and Battlemasters, then what assaults have the magical ability to deal with lights so much more easily? King Crabs because they have low mounts? Not really. All I have to do is put my Locust behind one and I can usually kill him without him ever being able to see me. Is it Atlases with arm weapons? No... I can easily hug their butts with a Shadowcat, let alone a Locust.

Well isn't this odd since we have our comp overlords claiming a std 300 atlas can turn fast enough to always keep any light in sight. I do wish you guys would get together and get your stories straight....

[Troutmonkey]

Removing arm-lock won't solve the problem, and the problem is high alpha damage to a single pixel.

This could easily be solved by a simple reticle bloom system whereby shooting lots of weapons causes your weapons fire to spread over an area. The more and bigger weapons you fire all at once, the bigger the spread. Shooting in chain fire will still allow you to hit where you aim, but stops the "IMA FIRIN MAH LAZORS BLAAAAAAUGH" crowd from just shooting everything at once and instantly blowing off your side torso.

I keep saying this but Homeless Bill had this solved years ago before clans even dropped
http://www.qqmercs.c...ence-and-clans/

Edited by Troutmonkey, 07 February 2016 - 03:57 PM.

[Tarogato]

Troutmonkey, on 07 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Removing arm-lock won't solve the problem, and the problem is high alpha damage to a single pixel.

This could easily be solved by a simple reticle bloom system whereby shooting lots of weapons causes your weapons fire to spread over an area. The more and bigger weapons you fire all at once, the bigger the spread. Shooting in chain fire will still allow you to hit where you aim, but stops the "IMA FIRIN MAH LAZORS BLAAAAAAUGH" crowd from just shooting everything at once and instantly blowing off your side torso.

I keep saying this but Homeless Bill had this solved years ago before clans even dropped
http://www.qqmercs.c...ence-and-clans/

I am completely in favour of this. Much better penalty than ghost heat. Wanna fire 6 ERLL together? Enjoy having each one hit a different grid on your map.

Edited by Tarogato, 07 February 2016 - 03:59 PM.

[TexAce]

Arm lock is against what Battletech is supposed to be and be played. Pinpointing using Armlock is nothing anyone ever wanted to achieve with this feature, it was solely meant as a crutch for new players to learn their mech.

Thus it only should be activated in the first 25-100 matches of a pilot. after that, it should just not exist.

[GenghisJr]

No thanks. Arm lock stops screen shake, what was your concern about it?

[MechWarrior4023212]

Troutmonkey, on 07 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Removing arm-lock won't solve the problem, and the problem is high alpha damage to a single pixel.

This could easily be solved by a simple reticle bloom system whereby shooting lots of weapons causes your weapons fire to spread over an area.

We have shotgun ballistics and missiles that do spread.

A laser is a precise weapon!

[LordNothing]

i dont think torso weapons shouldn't auto-converge at all. fixed convergence maybe, that is permanently set at the weapons optimal range. they cannot re adjust on the fly (they are set by the tech in the mech lab). the actuators just arent there. not to say that there shouldn't be torso and hip (allowing leg weapons) turrets on some mechs but those should consume a critical or two for the turret (some of the artwork shows these even if battletech doesn't outright acknowledge it). and thats fair because you trade a slot for some tracking ability. no actuator no tracking.

of course none of that fixes high alphas or good aim. a rack of medium lasers set to converge at 270 meters might still hit you square in the cockpit with a little distance control. most players already do this to be effective with srms or keep their distance at exactly 190 so they can lerm underground (thats one of those "lermin' like a boss" strategies). no matter what you do elites will adapt and still mop the floor with you and anything that keeps them down keeps you down too.

[Moldur]

This is the weakest solution I've read so far. The problem with a temporary fix is this: do you think PGI will ever actually remove said temporary fix once they change something else that nerfs laser vomit? No.

Besides PGI not being able to code itself out of a box, I don't see why we should settle for less if we could solve it by having manual convergence that we have to set in increments during the game. No gimmick. Doesn't hurt anything else. It is nothing more and nothing less than forcing imperfect convergence by making it player controlled.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I think it would help a bit (mostly with mechs without lower arm actuators). Again, It wouldn't be a big difference, but it would help a bit.

[Aresye]

LordNothing, on 07 February 2016 - 07:30 PM, said:

i dont think torso weapons shouldn't auto-converge at all. fixed convergence maybe, that is permanently set at the weapons optimal range. they cannot re adjust on the fly (they are set by the tech in the mech lab). the actuators just arent there. not to say that there shouldn't be torso and hip (allowing leg weapons) turrets on some mechs but those should consume a critical or two for the turret (some of the artwork shows these even if battletech doesn't outright acknowledge it). and thats fair because you trade a slot for some tracking ability. no actuator no tracking.

of course none of that fixes high alphas or good aim. a rack of medium lasers set to converge at 270 meters might still hit you square in the cockpit with a little distance control. most players already do this to be effective with srms or keep their distance at exactly 190 so they can lerm underground (thats one of those "lermin' like a boss" strategies). no matter what you do elites will adapt and still mop the floor with you and anything that keeps them down keeps you down too.

What solution do you propose to avoid mechs like the HBK, that have lots of hardpoints packed very close to each other, from completely dominating the game?

[MeiSooHaityu]

Aresye, on 07 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

What solution do you propose to avoid mechs like the HBK, that have lots of hardpoints packed very close to each other, from completely dominating the game?

Even with energy that tightly bundled, there is still convergence and the beams would still scatter after the fixed convergence point.

Also, most mechs don't have that much energy clustered together and a mech that does (such as the Hunchback 4P) has it all in one torso. If fixed convergence was a thing, and the Hunchback was good at it, then things like the structure buffs could be dialed back to compensate. Even a mech like the Nova (with 6 energy in each arm) has the vulnerability of those tightly clustered weapons being in a more vulnerable arm.

And again, fixed convergence still would spread the fire past a certain point anyway (as said above). So basically, j don't see any of this being too large of a concern.

[Mister Blastman]

Aresye, on 07 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

What solution do you propose to avoid mechs like the HBK, that have lots of hardpoints packed very close to each other, from completely dominating the game?

Non-issue. Shoot torso, guns gone. Problem solved.

Quirks would be gone, too.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mister Blastman, on 07 February 2016 - 09:34 PM, said:

Non-issue. Shoot torso, guns gone. Problem solved.

Quirks would be gone, too.

It is easy to say that, but how are you going to do that effectively if he is out-trading you because he has better clustered convergence when you are unable to focus that damage into the Hunch? Quirks being gone would also make mechs like the Vindicator even sadder, same with the Treb (because their weapons are far away from the cockpit to begin with).

Believe it or not, instant convergence helps mechs with bad hardpoint locations more than it helps the good ones.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 07 February 2016 - 10:25 PM.

[Ultimax]

Mister Blastman, on 07 February 2016 - 09:34 PM, said:

Non-issue. Shoot torso, guns gone. Problem solved.

Your solution would require your weapons to have convergence good enough to focus that torso.

So I guess that would be out then.

[Mister Blastman]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 07 February 2016 - 10:21 PM, said:

It is easy to say that, but how are you going to do that effectively if he is out-trading you because he has better clustered convergence when you are unable to focus that damage into the Hunch? Quirks being gone would also make mechs like the Vindicator even sadder, same with the Treb (because their weapons are far away from the cockpit to begin with).

Believe it or not, instant convergence helps mechs with bad hardpoint locations more than it helps the good ones.

To imagine this requires a paradigm shift.

You won't be running the same loadouts. For 'mechs that have spread out hardpoints, you'll run bigger guns in some to provide higher FLD. Or you'll run SRMs. You'll adapt.

You can't base a counterargument all on one single 'mech. You've got to change how you think because all the parameters will have, too.

That hunch will have six medium lasers at medium range and will still be as vulnerable as before. Besides, it is a medium unquirked 'mech thus will be weaker by proxy of size and lack of armor alone. It takes care of itself.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mister Blastman, on 07 February 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

That hunch will have six medium lasers at medium range and will still be as vulnerable as before. Besides, it is a medium unquirked 'mech thus will be weaker by proxy of size and lack of armor alone. It takes care of itself.

Except it doesn't because you are removing the ability to focus the hunch with mech outside of those that are similar. Mechs like the Banshee, Battlemaster, etc will still be strong just like any other, but those like the Black Knight, Nova, Warhawk, Gargoyle will all suffer more than they do already from poor hardpoint locations, ESPECIALLY without quirks.

Mister Blastman, on 07 February 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

You won't be running the same loadouts. For 'mechs that have spread out hardpoints, you'll run bigger guns in some to provide higher FLD. Or you'll run SRMs. You'll adapt.

That makes no sense when the mechs with better hardpoints can mount the same weapons, meaning they are still better for the task. Keeping in mind the Vindicator and Treb already try and mount one or the other as you suggest, and would still be trash tier.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 07 February 2016 - 10:56 PM.

[LordNothing]

Aresye, on 07 February 2016 - 09:16 PM, said:

What solution do you propose to avoid mechs like the HBK, that have lots of hardpoints packed very close to each other, from completely dominating the game?

i figure there are 3 ways to spread the damage

1. parallel beams. all the beams fire straight and in parallel with eachother, they hit the enemy with the same pattern as the firing mech's hardpoints. the spread is the same at all distances. mechs with widely placed hardpoints are at a disadvantage to ones tightly placed hardpoints.

2. fixed convergence. beams all cross the crosshair at the weapons optimal range. this creates a hot spot that can deliver a pinpoint strike, however it requires fine control over target distance. fire at any other range and the beams diverge and spread. boat a single laser type and you get penalized by ghost heat, boat multiple lasers and you get multiple hotspots at different ranges, spreading damage in an alpha.

3. some kind of hybrid. weapons in each section all fire in parallel with eachother, but the center of the pattern crosses the crosshair at the optimal range. this creates a lot of scatter at all ranges and more away from optimal range. this creates issues, like if you have a small pulse and an er large , then at what distance does the pattern pass through the crosshair. you might use the average optimal distance so more laser diversity, the more dispersed the hot zone is, less laser diversity, and then ghost heat gets you.



ghost heat or spread, choose the penalty you can live with.

i think there are other ways that dont involve changing the way the convergence works. windowing lasers for example. lasers only produce full damage in a very narrow range. take the medium laser damage ramps up from 25% at the hardpoint to 100% at 220, maintain full damage to 270, and then ramp back down to zero. try to beat ghost heat with weapon diversity and you end up doing less damage.

ghost heat also doesn't work very well. you can still do pretty high alphas without penalty. a mere 30 point alpha can kill most lights in a couple shots and most assaults in 4 or 5. because you arent invoking ghost heat, you get away with it, and are able to pop those off almost as fast as your weapons cycle. but 30 points is nothing, 6 clan medium pulse lasers can do a 48 point alpha without penalty, it will saturate your bar but you can do it, back off and hide for a few seconds. clan small pulse can do 36 damage and can fire 3 or 4 shots before you need to cool down (thats enough to core a dire from the front). you can make ghost heat a bit more draconian. but then pros will mix their laser classes. if ghost heat was instead based on the amount of heat from all weapons per strike (alpha or group), then it would force players to curb their alphas a bit more and keep their groups smaller. you might see boating come back but it would curb the high alphas a lot, but then again maybe boating was never really the issue.

Edited by LordNothing, 08 February 2016 - 12:06 AM.

[TexAce]

Ultimax, on 07 February 2016 - 10:26 PM, said:

Your solution would require your weapons to have convergence good enough to focus that torso.

So I guess that would be out then.

Why would it be out? Shoot with arm-mounted weapons, where you do the converging by yourself.

Everyone who thinks a Hunchy would be the meta when weapons finally have convergence time is a clown.

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 01:57 AM.

[Aresye]

Mister Blastman, on 07 February 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

To imagine this requires a paradigm shift.

I think you guys need to have a paradigm shift, because you're focusing so much on the actual gameplay and TTK, while failing to consider:
1. What kind of impact this would have on a growing player base, post-steam launch?
- I think it's very risky and naive to assume that the number of players that would return and/or be attracted to the "new improved MWO," would come even close to the number of players who would quit the game entirely.
- The idea "must" be able to maintain and/or grow the current player base.

2. What kind of impact this would have on the meta/balance?
- Right now we have dozens of mechs that are effective, both Clan and IS. The number of viable chassis and variants has literally NEVER been more diverse than it is right now.
- Excluding a few outliers, balance is closer than it's ever been before.
- Changing the fundamental mechanics of aim in this game in such an extreme manner WILL completely reset all balancing efforts up to this point. The meta will change, and with the new meta will come an entirely new list of balance problems. As an example, just look back at the attempted, "Press R for max laser range," change. Very small change. HUGE impact.
- What will the new meta be? Is there new potential for abuse?

3. What kind of impact this would have on the game as a whole?
- Would a change like this really give players what they want?
- Would a change like this be compatible with other systems in the game, or would a complete overhaul be needed?
- Could a change like this be implemented in a timely, cost-effective manner?

Remember, PGI is a business. They need both players and cost-saving techniques in order to produce a profit. If you want a different convergence system, you need to do some heavy brainstorming, because if you ever want PGI to consider a new system, it has to satisfy this simple risk assessment:

Will net players increase? Y/N
- If NO = abort
- If YES = proceed below...

Will the potential revenue from an increase in net players be equal to or greater than the cost of development? Y/N
- If NO = abort
- If YES = idea is possibly worthwhile to implement