1094 replies to this topic

[Rampancy]

YueFei, on 09 February 2016 - 08:18 AM, said:

Same way Counterstrike players adapt. Instead of spraying shots as quickly as they can, they stutter-step and take deliberate shots.

CS also has the ability to start and stop on a dime and one-shot kills. CS:GO also trashed bursting accuracy while buffing damage significantly to compensate on several weapons, which is why I put a fraction of the time into it that I put into 1.6 or Source.

GO boosted the role of RNJesus, but all of the outside-of-game features are lightyears ahead of the previous iterations.

[Hotthedd]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 08:04 AM, said:

Fallacious, all of those factors still have to be considered even with convergence, the only difference is that there isn't an RNG affecting the end result.

In MWO, the difference between hitting the enemy's arm and hitting their side torso is pretty frequently the difference between life and death. I'm not okay with an arbitrary RNG system making that choice for me, NOR am I okay with it encouraging me to stand still like an idiot. How would lights even survive in that environment, anyway? Movement modifiers are okay in foot soldier FPS games where you can stop and aim on a dime, but battlemechs don't get that luxury and it's not reasonable to expect people to stop in the name of RNG.

You insist RNG is somehow skill, but it's only the opposite, because anything it would make you "consider" is something you should have already been considering in regards to the possibility of pilot error. A more stale and rigid meta is all it will accomplish, there's nothing to be gained with this system.

So if chain fire kept pinpoint precision, a good player would have no problem bypassing the mechanic entirely and switching to chain fire.
Win/Win.

[Ratpoison]

YueFei, on 09 February 2016 - 08:18 AM, said:

Same way Counterstrike players adapt. Instead of spraying shots as quickly as they can, they stutter-step and take deliberate shots.

I'd love to see you try do this in an Atlas. Don't worry, I wont mind if you die a few times trying. It wont be much of a stutter step with that deceleration rate though.

Or hey, maybe it only works in games where you're able to move freely on a split second's notice, and we shouldn't be forcing it into MWO. Yeah.

[Alistair Winter]

I'd rather solve TTK problems with heat scale and penalties for high heat and overheating. I'd rather minimize the amount of luck involved, personally. I get that there's a certain amount of chance involved in military vehicles firing weapons, but this is a game with enough random factors involved already, for my tastes.

[Ratpoison]

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

So if chain fire kept pinpoint precision, a good player would have no problem bypassing the mechanic entirely and switching to chain fire.
Win/Win.

Incorrect, requiring me to chainfire requires me to maintain facetime, putting me at a significant defensive disadvantage. Bypassing the RNG by other means, like using tightly grouped weapons to make the firing line more predictable, and abusing defensive bonuses, will still be more effective.

[Mystere]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 09 February 2016 - 12:38 AM, said:

I just find it amazing that there IS a middle option and no one even seems to acknowledge it.

Multi-point reticle, as below:

[o x X x o]

The "o"s are the arm reticles, the small "x"s are the ST reticles and the big "X" is the CT and missile (lock) reticle.

No need for CoF, no need for convergence, no worry about HSR, breaks up then super-alpha and maintains pinpoint accuracy.

Moreover, it's simple.

This is not the first time I have suggested it. Why is this compromise being ignored!?

This is not an "either/or" problem with the only options being convergence or CoF. There IS another viable option!

Firstly, it's allegedly too difficult for people to understand.

Secondly, your reticle assumes the weapons hardpoints all form a line on the horizontal (). I'd rather have a dispersal pattern relative to reticle center or know enough details of the hardpoint locations that I will not even need the extra dots and just mentally imagine their relative position to center.

[Ratpoison]

Alistair Winter, on 09 February 2016 - 08:33 AM, said:

I'd rather solve TTK problems with heat scale and penalties for high heat and overheating. I'd rather minimize the amount of luck involved, personally. I get that there's a certain amount of chance involved in military vehicles firing weapons, but this is a game with enough random factors involved already, for my tastes.

To be honest, most of the current problems seem to stem from the imbalance of lasers. As a group right now, the disadvantages they're supposed to have(high heat, burn time) are negligible compared to the advantages that you get in the form of raw burst DPS. It feels like the power creep of quirks have negated most of the disadvantages that the heat and burn times of lasers previously held, making it easy to boat tons of mixed lasers for maximum burst, without giving your opponent enough time to reasonably roll the huge amount of damage.

[Hotthedd]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 08:38 AM, said:

Incorrect, requiring me to chainfire requires me to maintain facetime, putting me at a significant defensive disadvantage. Bypassing the RNG by other means, like using tightly grouped weapons to make the firing line more predictable, and abusing defensive bonuses, will still be more effective.

So then it is not precision that you really want, it is the lolpha crutch that you vigorously defend.

At least we are clear on that point now.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 08:38 AM, said:

Incorrect, requiring me to chainfire requires me to maintain facetime, putting me at a significant defensive disadvantage. Bypassing the RNG by other means, like using tightly grouped weapons to make the firing line more predictable, and abusing defensive bonuses, will still be more effective.

Or, everyone just goes back to Gauss boats, because they have no heat, and would be ok with the peek/poke style thus bringing full circle back to CB where hot long range weapons were worthless and Gauss reigned king.

[Ratpoison]

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:

So then it is not precision that you really want, it is the lolpha crutch that you vigorously defend.

At least we are clear on that point now.

Um no, what I want is better weapon balance that puts lasers in a more appropriate place than they are now. I'm only telling you how the meta will respond to the environment you create with this system, and how it isn't going to be what you want. Believe me or not, doesn't make a difference to me. If you can't understand how extending your facetime is a bad plan then you probably couldn't understand a deeper explanation.

[Alistair Winter]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 08:45 AM, said:

To be honest, most of the current problems seem to stem from the imbalance of lasers. As a group right now, the disadvantages they're supposed to have(high heat, burn time) are negligible compared to the advantages that you get in the form of raw burst DPS. It feels like the power creep of quirks have negated most of the disadvantages that the heat and burn times of lasers previously held, making it easy to boat tons of mixed lasers for maximum burst, without giving your opponent enough time to reasonably roll the huge amount of damage.

I agree 100%, and I've always argued this. In my view, the ideal situation in MWO would be this:

• Lasers = really hot, but high accuracy.
  
• Missiles = pretty hot, higher damage, but low accuracy
  
• Ballistics = Very cool, but lower DPS and mediocre accuracy (no instant hit)

In the ideal situation, boating lasers would result in significantly lower DPS for most mechs, because SRMs and ballistics should have vastly better damage per heat. The only exceptions would be mechs like the Nova or the Crab, which are known laserboats. They would need quirks to be viable.

In MWO, the heat penalty for boating lasers simply isn't enough. The benefit of combining SRMs with lasers is rarely enough, unless you can run 4xSRM4 or 4xSRM6. And ballistics are way too hot, so combining an AC20 with lasers results in overheating often.

(How PPCs fit into my ideal triangle is kind of complicated, because there should be some incentive for combining PPCs and lasers. Right now, it's almost impossible)

[Greyhart]

Isn't face time for accuracy suppose to be how these things work. Snipers need time to get the shot but if you're firing from the hip you are going to be inaccurate?

That would make a rather interesting balance if the long range weapons had a real problem with cone of fire in close up fights but the close range weapons don't. that would promote a diverse load out, not sure how that would work though.

[Mystere]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 04:20 AM, said:

As if RNG is supposed to be more skill than aiming? Okay. But then again, you are the guy who can't make a post without declaring all opposition as evil.

Then stop depicting CoF as also being evil.

[Hotthedd]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 08:51 AM, said:

Um no, what I want is better weapon balance that puts lasers in a more appropriate place than they are now. I'm only telling you how the meta will respond to the environment you create with this system, and how it isn't going to be what you want. Believe me or not, doesn't make a difference to me. If you can't understand how extending your facetime is a bad plan then you probably couldn't understand a deeper explanation.

Extending your face time now is death. But if landing full lolphas was near-impossible, it WOULDN'T be death, just lots of damage. There would actually be more than ONE way to play the game effectively. There would be CHOICE! Precision or raw damage (but not both), tactical movement with alpha penalties OR static defense with one good alpha.

You decried boring gameplay, but boring gameplay is EXACTLY what we have now.

[Mark of Caine]

Didn't read the entire thread but definitely love the OP's post. I proposed something along these lines a year or so ago but it fell on deaf ears. I sincerely hope PGI puts this on the PTS for players to playtest. I am all for something like this, and would add that movement (from standing still for snipers, to max run for brawlers) increase the reticule growth. Both will hit, and snipers will be able to pinpoint whereas brawlers can soften up and finish off targets inside 300m.

This proposal is win-win for everyone in my book, and I'd come back to the game if it were implemented. So sick and tired of getting a side torso one-shotted on a heavy mech from 800m away. As it currently stands, it's as if I might as well not even bother putting armor in that section.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

just lots of damage.

Just lots of damage means you are still making bad trades thus makes that route a bad idea. Not sure why you say that people die in one shot though, with the structure quirks and registration still a little off on lights, most things should be able to survive a single alpha from even the heaviest of hitters.

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

tactical movement to get within brawl range OR static defense with gauss spam

First, FTFY.
Second, so we have two extreme options and no in-between, sounds more boring than what we have currently. Definitely limits what you can do and what parts of the map you can do it on.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 February 2016 - 09:08 AM.

[KahnWongFuChung]

Given Convergence can't be fixed by PGI while still keeping HSR in tact, I think CoF is the way to go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry TexAce wont work why? Because the Current server AI setup wont allow it. There is a Server Side AI and it adjusts damage per battle per player in its attempt to maintain a 50/50 win/loss ratio per player per battle. You can overcome it the Server Side AI Control to achieve a 1.0+ win/loss ratio but it then tries every battle to drag you back down to a 50/50 win/loss balance.

So until PGI gets rid of the Server Side AI control your theory's wont work.

Evil server AI below

Edited by KahnWongFuChung, 09 February 2016 - 09:16 AM.

[Mystere]

tortuousGoddess, on 09 February 2016 - 04:50 AM, said:

No, that's exactly what that adds up to. It doesn't take one hit to kill an enemy, it takes several, repeated attacks on specific components, which is exactly why CoF is such a problem. If the RNG decides to shuffle half my damage off of the side torso and onto an arm while I'm engaged, that damage is effectively wasted, and if the opponent gets better rolls, RNG declares a winner rather than piloting skill.

That is not okay.

I think the problem is that your idea of CoF, is this:



an equal distribution on the circular area.

But, what many proponents of CoF are actually advocating is this:



a normal distribution centered on the target.

Is a 5% chance of missing the targeted panel really that crippling, especially if you hit and severely damage another panel anyway? And that's not even counting the ways the OP proposed to mitigate that CoF.

That is why some people here think you and others are just saying no regardless of the presented arguments.

As for myself, I still prefer:

• pinpoint convergence in the presence of a lock
  
• fixed convergence in the absence of one

As far as I am concerned, it's a good enough approximation of the delayed convergence we had during closed beta.

Edited by Mystere, 09 February 2016 - 09:17 AM.

[TexAce]

KahnWongFuChung, on 09 February 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

Given Convergence can't be fixed by PGI while still keeping HSR in tact, I think CoF is the way to go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry TexAce wont work why? Because the Current server AI setup wont allow it. There is a Server Side AI and it adjusts damage per battle per player in its attempt to maintain a 50/50 win/loss ratio per player per battle. You can overcome it the Server Side AI Control to achieve a 1.0+ win/loss ratio but it then tries every battle to drag you back down to a 50/50 win/loss balance.

So until PGI gets rid of the Server Side AI control your theory's wont work.

OK great now we are reaching tinfoil-quality argumentation. Great.

[Kuritaclan]

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

(I did not watch video before responding thinking it was in German ...)

That is neither the free-electron laser (extreme ultraviolet, x-rays) nor gamma-ray laser used in Battletech.
...
BattleTech uses an entirely different set of laser technologies. The "beams" their real-life equivalents produce -- extreme ultraviolet, x-ray, gamma radiation -- are not exactly easy to "aim".

Well the setup of the books e.g. ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma ray lasers is sure something else. But non or less it was thinking ahead, when Battle Tech was created. Also notice that x-ray and gamma ray is a exaggeration to hook players/readers in the 80/90s to the game with think ahead tech. Still working as intended.

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

Heck, I might not know German, but looking at your diagram it looks like it uses an array of electrically driven lasers, such as diode lasers and fiber laser amplifiers. If so, then I think that is similar to this:

Spoiler

Since we are talking about future Lasers it is hard to say what a real world equipment would look like. The point is 6t of equipment are mostly eaten up by energy unit and the "laser generating" unit itself. The aiming component is tiny compared to the energysource and the laser "array" (if needed) itself.

If you couple every laser unit with a optical device like glass fiber to bunch them up and conenctrate and direct energy many things are possible.

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

Heck, they may even be using the same or similar basic devices, and differing only on the beam focusing/aiming mechanism used.

Having said that, do you have an English translation or source for that same device. I many no longer work with laser and plasma(!!!) devices, but I am still interested.

i only can provide you the feature links. However rheinmetall did not even talk about the laser units it is "confidetial". The system used today is superimposing to concentrate a couple of beams into one spot. What is more or less what we have in the game since Battlemechs are superimposing a couple of small lasers or medium into one point. xD

http://www.rheinmeta..._hel_live_fire/ (eng.)
http://www.rheinmeta...e_hel/index.php (eng.)

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 08:08 AM, said:

And finally. no, I obviously do not have a problem.

Edit:

What a useless video. It's just the typical marketing fluff. I thought it would at least contain a good description of the underlying lasers.

Sure it is marketing fluff - but it is a showcase of capability of todays tracking and targeting systems and also laser weapons. So to speak Battle Tech Setup is no alternative future, it is a future setup in our past along side human development. Or in other words we do not really know the tech of the year 3000+, but it is all part of the past and the today technology.

And on topic - Lasers Do not have any issues with convergence. If there is anything that converted from real life into the game has problems with convergence and cof, then it would be ballistics and ppc. Since plasma is incomprehensive non solid energy/matter accelerated into a direction but has spread build in. And concentration on ACs they are no damn machine guns which deal with heavy recoil. As it stand with those cooldowns they are easy to manipulate into a static setup instead of dynamic where every minute a couple hundred bullets leave the barrel. Also the velocity in the game is a way to high for "real world" projectiles - Yes i'm looking at you AC2/AC5/AC10 rounds. So over all the game itself how it is set up has problems to match the real world in first place. Punching the convergence issue because lasers in real world do not match those of the battle tech world does not hit the nail at all.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 09 February 2016 - 09:34 AM.