1094 replies to this topic

[CDLord HHGD]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 March 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

So you want a weapon that isn't even good boated (because no mech can boat enough) to be nerfed harder so that PPC/Gauss/LPL boats become stronger to kill the boating mentality (even though it doesn't)? There is nothing wrong with wanting to use weapons that synergize well with each other, and trying to defeat that mentality, well this isn't going to do it because the need for synergy will always be there. All you are doing is disproportionately hurting smaller weapons which have more need to be boated to be as effective as their larger more singular cousins.

So use my formula and change the equation. It's really not that hard. 3xSL=2xML=1xLL* So for three or less SLs, no CoF. Boating of any kind should be penalized except in the instances where the mech itself is designed for it and even in those cases, the penalties not completely mitigated, but lessened. We're in multi-ton warmachines duking it out, not playing CoD gank with a combat knife.....
*Again I reference my usual caveat that I explained earlier.

[Khereg]

I propose all my opponents be required to equip marshmallow cannons and pillow mortars.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

cdlord, on 16 March 2016 - 10:25 AM, said:

We're in multi-ton warmachines duking it out, not playing CoD gank with a combat knife.....

We also aren't in multi-ton warmachines at the OK Corral.

[CDLord HHGD]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 March 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

We also aren't in multi-ton warmachines at the OK Corral.

What?

If you are referencing the map size, I agree, they need to be a multitude of times larger than they are now.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

cdlord, on 16 March 2016 - 10:37 AM, said:

What?

If you are referencing the map size, I agree, they need to be a multitude of times larger than they are now.

No, I am referencing the inaccuracy of the guns used in that fight in during that era in general.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 March 2016 - 10:49 AM.

[Mystere]

1453 R, on 16 March 2016 - 09:28 AM, said:

Let me ask you a question, Mystere. Just for kicks, since you’re the most poignant to pick on sort of a leading figure in this whole so-called ‘debate’.

Do modern MBTs hit what they shoot at?

To the best of my knowledge, a modern tank is able to put its shells on a target at least equivalent to the center torso of an average BattleMech at distances far in excess of anything but the very longest-ranged of MWO weapons. They can do so reliably, with every single shot they fire. They can do so on the move – in point of fact, I recall a slice of documentary I saw a while ago that listed the Abrahms as able to compensate for its full nominal throttle value and still hit targets with every shot they fire, assuming a competent crew and no active enemy interference (i.e. electronic warfare or other…distractants, maybe?).

Now, I am fully cognizant of the fact that BattleTech is in general a property where precision is fundamentally, philosophically a disfavored concept – technology in the BattleTech universe is anachronistically generally worse than current norms, with the exception of mostly-lostech jumpships regarded as priceless and irreplaceable treasures of the golden past. That said…a modern tank crew which is unsure of its shot is not actually going to take that shot. They don’t fire their weapon when the weapon has a high chance of missing its mark – they wait for a better shot.

Yes yes, I know, I know, I KNOW – that’s what you keep saying you’re trying to force players to do. ‘Wait for the better shot’. Try and get them to stop firing more than two small lasers at once and get back to the BattleTech™, where firing one large laser a turn was considered a perfectly acceptable level of combat engagement for an assault ‘Mech…but here’s my thing.

The systems you and the other Cone of Balance™ folks are describing make those better shots impossible. There is no waiting for the better shot – the better shot will never come. Outside of actually, physically ramming your ‘Mech up your enemies’ rectums and firing your weapons at zero-range engagements, you will never have more than spotty odds at best of hitting whatever you’re shooting at. You can never get your fire to go more than vaguely in the general direction of where the crosshair points, because fire going where it’s supposed to Just Isn’t BattleTech™

Modern militaries have spent a great deal of time, effort, and defense budget dollars into ensuring that ordnance goes where it’s supposed to. Why is it acceptable for ‘Mech-delivered ordnance to go wherever it feels like going, no matter what the pilot does to try and compensate?

What modern MBT has 4 to 12 multi-ton weapons pointing in perfect unison with automatic, near-instant, and pixel-perfect convergence at the same target? None? Then what's the point of your question again?

And you've not been paying attention:

• My position on this is well established and it's not CoF. But I have no big objection either.
  
• There is a huge difference between an equal and normal distribution. People calling for a CoF are not calling for the former. Do you even understand what equal and normal distributions are?

And pick on me? Who do you think I am, some loser named Marco Rubio?

Edited by Mystere, 16 March 2016 - 11:13 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 March 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

No, I am referencing the inaccuracy of the guns used in that fight in during that era in general.

Well during the time period referenced, I do believe they were using cartridges with rifled bores. Pretty accurate, but not 100% (due to the manufacturing of the time). Much better than the old smooth bore firearms were.

Modern weapons are pretty accurate and when you consider unfortunate exchanges between cops and bad guys, then accuracy takes another hit.

[1453 R]

Mystere, on 16 March 2016 - 11:02 AM, said:

What modern MBT has 4 to 12 multi-ton weapons pointing in perfect unison with automatic, near-instant, and pixel-perfect convergence at the same target? None? Then what's the point of your question again?

And you've not been paying attention:

• My position on this is well established and it's not CoF. But I have no big objection either.
  
• There is a huge difference between an equal and normal distribution. People calling for a CoF are not calling for the former. Do you even understand what equal and normal distributions are?

And pick on me? Who do you think I am, some loser named Marco Rubio?

The point of my question was that the closest modern equivalent to a BattleMech does. Not. SHOOT. If it’s not going to hit. Yes, misses still happen. They’re irregularities, however – things to be avoided, things that result in inspections or additional training for crews. Modern heavy combat vehicles do not just throw shots out there more or less randomly and hope for the best.

Yeah, I know. This is a video game, and tanks are not ‘Mechs. I would argue that if the principles of good game design don’t apply (which many people have apparently decided is the case) because it’s not SIMULATION enough for them…then the realism people are hoping all those Cone of Balance™ stuff brings to the game should be relied on instead.

Normal distribution does not save you when your ‘crosshair’ is the size of a quarter of the screen. If you have to stop dead in your tracks, zero out your heat bar, and fire in chainfire mode in order to get your normal distribution down far enough to reliable hit a center-mass shot past 400m? Well, guess what – you’re going to die. A lot. And you will not accomplish much of anything before you do it.

Until, y’know, you switch to SRMs like everyone else. Or until we get melee and can play MechPuncher Online for a chunk instead.

[Mystere]

1453 R, on 16 March 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

It's a PC game remarkably few people will play if there's no way to reliably hit their targets. Missing all the ****ing time For Great Balance™, regardless of your own ability to target and engage enemies, is not fun, eh?

Game Not Fun? Game not played.

Your gross exaggerations betray you.

Let me ask you this. How often does an R95 system miss?

1453 R, on 16 March 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

The point of my question was that the closest modern equivalent to a BattleMech does. Not. SHOOT. If it’s not going to hit. Yes, misses still happen. They’re irregularities, however – things to be avoided, things that result in inspections or additional training for crews. Modern heavy combat vehicles do not just throw shots out there more or less randomly and hope for the best.

Yeah, I know. This is a video game, and tanks are not ‘Mechs. I would argue that if the principles of good game design don’t apply (which many people have apparently decided is the case) because it’s not SIMULATION enough for them…then the realism people are hoping all those Cone of Balance™ stuff brings to the game should be relied on instead.

Normal distribution does not save you when your ‘crosshair’ is the size of a quarter of the screen. If you have to stop dead in your tracks, zero out your heat bar, and fire in chainfire mode in order to get your normal distribution down far enough to reliable hit a center-mass shot past 400m? Well, guess what – you’re going to die. A lot. And you will not accomplish much of anything before you do it.

Until, y’know, you switch to SRMs like everyone else. Or until we get melee and can play MechPuncher Online for a chunk instead.

Sigh. I will ask again. What modern MBT has 4 to 12 multi-ton weapons pointing in perfect unison with automatic, near-instant, and pixel-perfect convergence at the same target?

1453 R, on 16 March 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

Normal distribution does not save you when your ‘crosshair’ is the size of a quarter of the screen.

Just because gross exaggerations work for [REDACTED] does not really mean it will work here too.

Edited by Scout Derek, 16 March 2016 - 01:35 PM.
No politics Mystere, keep on topic.

[Scout Derek]

1453 R, relax. don't respond to the trolls, I'll make sure they don't mess with you or anyone in this conversation.

[CDLord HHGD]

Comparing MWO and Battlemechs to modern war tech is inherently stupid. Battlemechs would be useless on modern battlefields, this has been said over and over again and it's correct so we gotta take the "modern" out of battletech. People also forget that lostech applies to more than just guns. Circuit boards of the likes you'd find in your NES were sacred and reserved for war machines, a lot of the rest was reduced to using cathode ray tubes.

Think late 70's early 80's reduced to using WWII era technology. The modern world has NO place in that.

So, can a sherman tank shoot more accurately stopped? I'm pretty sure it can. Is its accuracy reduced if it shoots on the move? I'm pretty sure it is. I know movies sensationalize things but Fury is a rather good tank movie.

In this, COF can be a viable option, but it would have to be an intelligent system dependent on many dynamic factors. How many weapons are being fired? How fast is the mech moving? How hot is the mech running (back to my heat scale suggestion).

A modern Abrams would **** any battlemech we have so there's no point in the comparison anymore.

[ComradeHavoc]

cdlord, on 17 March 2016 - 04:46 AM, said:

Comparing MWO and Battlemechs to modern war tech is inherently stupid. Battlemechs would be useless on modern battlefields, this has been said over and over again and it's correct so we gotta take the "modern" out of battletech. People also forget that lostech applies to more than just guns. Circuit boards of the likes you'd find in your NES were sacred and reserved for war machines, a lot of the rest was reduced to using cathode ray tubes.

Think late 70's early 80's reduced to using WWII era technology. The modern world has NO place in that.

So, can a sherman tank shoot more accurately stopped? I'm pretty sure it can. Is its accuracy reduced if it shoots on the move? I'm pretty sure it is. I know movies sensationalize things but Fury is a rather good tank movie.

In this, COF can be a viable option, but it would have to be an intelligent system dependent on many dynamic factors. How many weapons are being fired? How fast is the mech moving? How hot is the mech running (back to my heat scale suggestion).

A modern Abrams would **** any battlemech we have so there's no point in the comparison anymore.

Or a large heat resistant mirror

[Grrzoot]

very detailed and well thought out post. but i will never get behind the Cof idea.

[dervishx5]

Too late for this idea to be implemented. Putting it in would see an exodus of tryhards not seen since the 3rd-Person Fiasco.

But I'd like to see something like this in the next Mechwarrior game.

[Mystere]

Scout Derek, on 16 March 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

1453 R, relax. don't respond to the trolls, I'll make sure they don't mess with you or anyone in this conversation.

Did 1453R suffer another meltdown?