1094 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

Because it also dumbs down the aiming at the same time? If you can fire with a reasonable spread (ie as minimal as possible) that forces you to aim center mass all the time, is that really better for the game, making all mechs behave like shotguns of some sort (provided you alpha)? Honestly I don't think so, and it definitely makes XLs even more viable when you aren't able to single out their sides, which is a problem given they are already really viable.

People are already aiming center of mass with boated weapons anyway, and most consider IS XL engines death-traps in all but a few mechs, such as lights. It's not as if adding a cone of fire is suddenly going to turn LBX's into god-tier weapons or make laser-boating useless. It's also not going to make good players stupid, poor players god-tier, or make table-top mechs that are a shambles of unorganized weapons viable.What it will do is cut down on overly easy, long-rang kills of mechs and perhaps encourage people to do something other than hide behind a rock most of the game, taking quick peaks with boated lasers. Battletech was founded on the concept of mechs taking a ton of effort to destroy - I don't think it is unreasonable to have a FPS game supposedly founded on that IP treat mechs in a similar fashion vs. the current "two zaps and you're gone" meta.

Edited by oldradagast, 09 February 2016 - 03:43 PM.

[pyrocomp]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

Because it also dumbs down the aiming at the same time? If you can fire with a reasonable spread (ie as minimal as possible) that forces you to aim center mass all the time, is that really better for the game, making all mechs behave like shotguns of some sort (provided you alpha)? Honestly I don't think so, and it definitely makes XLs even more viable when you aren't able to single out their sides, which is a problem given they are already really viable.

No. You are exaggerating. The dead center of mass only for CT of a medium mech at about 500 m (if I get scales correctly), you can dead center the ST at the same distance. Get closer, eat STs all you like. The 'shotgun' is when you are alphaing near 90% heat while running newly bought mech in stock loadout. May help new players to actually hit anything as they aim poorly and this time Random may come their side. In case of cool calculated trades it actually gives an advantage to the one with more patience and less twitch. Which might get good.
And, by the way, as I can't get that from your response, are you ok with all those constant alphas? Shouldn't the alpha be the somewhat a risky action? Just for the sake of the same setting logic (the 'stompy robots' logic actually is all for alphas, combos, wunderwaffels and other superweapons).

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 02:10 PM, said:

If GR snipers aren't deadly now, they won't be after this change, and ERLL builds would be dead because they would require too much effort for so little gain. That's the part I don't think you understand, all things that make them deadly would be removed.

Very little heat would make them the most accurate weapons in the game, with big PPFLD and long range.

ERLLs too much effort? Honestly perhaps the burn time could be shortened, but that argument reads as if alpha laser vomit is a crutch. IMO, they are too EASY now.

[oldradagast]

pyrocomp, on 09 February 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

No. You are exaggerating. The dead center of mass only for CT of a medium mech at about 500 m (if I get scales correctly), you can dead center the ST at the same distance. Get closer, eat STs all you like. The 'shotgun' is when you are alphaing near 90% heat while running newly bought mech in stock loadout. May help new players to actually hit anything as they aim poorly and this time Random may come their side. In case of cool calculated trades it actually gives an advantage to the one with more patience and less twitch. Which might get good.
And, by the way, as I can't get that from your response, are you ok with all those constant alphas? Shouldn't the alpha be the somewhat a risky action? Just for the sake of the same setting logic (the 'stompy robots' logic actually is all for alphas, combos, wunderwaffels and other superweapons).

I agree with you, and I've had it listening to the nutty arguments of the people defending perfect, instant convergence. We've had everything from "removing perfect convergence removes skill from the game" to "removing perfect convergence will only hurt unskilled players" - and that's from one person!

They just don't get it. Convergence is NOT skill, and if a cone of fire is implemented, EVERYONE will be affected by it equally. I don't see how anyone can fail to understand this, or be blind to the problems instant perfect convergence has been causing in this game almost since the beginning.

They seem to be living in this fantasy world where any game that has any element of luck to it "requires no skill" - and even if that false statement were true, than MWO has "no skill" in it since it's full of luck. Everything from team composition, maps, spawn points, strike damage, crits, etc. Anyone who is going to be knocked off their elite pedestal of being a "competitive" player because they'll suffer a bit of laser scatter at long ranges and the occasional Gauss round will hit an adjacent component was never skilled to begin with.

[Ohmlink]

I will put my vote in for makeing a heat scale with consequence, getting rid of convergence, and then make lasers non hitscan a la MechWarrior 2.

Breaking up damage accross the mech is the goal and we know it has been done before.

I'd like COF more but that "takes away skill."

Edited by Ohmlink, 09 February 2016 - 03:59 PM.

[SQW]

Unfortunately, many vets are so invested in the current play style to want (or be able to) shift away from pinpoint accurate hit scan weapons. Can you imagine the next Battlefield game announces that there will be no recoil?

I started MWO a few months ago and if given the choice, I'd have gone with CoF because the unpredictability of shooting adds to the experience in my opinion. Able to place large amount of shots exactly where you aim instantly just feels like a throw back to 'good old days' of quake and doom.

Ideally, the solution would be a compromise where a cof will only appear when the heat reaches a certain level to simulate electronic deterioration due to heat stress. The alpha warriors can still keep there beloved laser boats but they wouldn't be able to alpha consecutively without loosing accuracy.

[TexAce]

550 comments and 3 threads about basically the same topic and no sight of PGI whatsoever.....tells enough.

[Hit the Deck]

TexAce, on 09 February 2016 - 04:24 PM, said:

550 comments and 3 threads about basically the same topic and no sight of PGI whatsoever.....tells enough.

They could very well have read this thread.

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

Because it also dumbs down the aiming at the same time? If you can fire with a reasonable spread (ie as minimal as possible) that forces you to aim center mass all the time, is that really better for the game, making all mechs behave like shotguns of some sort (provided you alpha)? Honestly I don't think so, and it definitely makes XLs even more viable when you aren't able to single out their sides, which is a problem given they are already really viable.

Again, it's an even vs. normal distribution thing. You seem to be talking of the former, while the CoF proponents are talking about the latter.

Edited by Mystere, 09 February 2016 - 04:31 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

oldradagast, on 09 February 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

People are already aiming center of mass with boated weapons anyway, and most consider IS XL engines death-traps in all but a few mechs, such as lights.

Are we really going to get into this discussion on this thread too .

First, IS XLs are what most good IS mechs run, they have to in order to be able to deal enough damage and keep up with the team, it has been that way for a while now. Don't be like Gyrok and try to say that STD's afford you massive sustainability bonuses because they don't if you are easy to core in the CT.
Second, center mass is different from shooting the CT, the CT is a strip that is part of center mass, you don't always aim there to get good shots.

pyrocomp, on 09 February 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

No. You are exaggerating. The dead center of mass only for CT of a medium mech at about 500 m (if I get scales correctly), you can dead center the ST at the same distance. Get closer, eat STs all you like. The 'shotgun' is when you are alphaing near 90%

No, because you are forgetting this counts moving, heat, and weapons fired into account, so yes, if you fire one at a time you can hit CT at 500m, but if you start to fire 2 things at a time, or start actually generating heat (because you know, heat is supposed to be a mechanic and not neutralized), you will quickly be unable to shoot accurately.

pyrocomp, on 09 February 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

And, by the way, as I can't get that from your response, are you ok with all those constant alphas? Shouldn't the alpha be the somewhat a risky action? Just for the sake of the same setting logic (the 'stompy robots' logic actually is all for alphas, combos, wunderwaffels and other superweapons).

I am ok with constant alphas because it is actually what makes weapons like AC2s, Small Lasers, MGs, Flamers, etc actually worthwhile. If I had to chain fire SRM2s, no one would touch them unless they fired like the Huginn pre-nerf.

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

Very little heat would make them the most accurate weapons in the game, with big PPFLD and long range.

Low heat won't make up for ERLL being forced to chainfire, sure it might help PPCs/ERPPCs which are too hot, but they aren't good extreme range weapons anyway.

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

ERLLs too much effort? Honestly perhaps the burn time could be shortened, but that argument reads as if alpha laser vomit is a crutch. IMO, they are too EASY now.

You are reading into things, there is a big difference between using 3 at a time with at worst a duration of 2.5seconds for 6 of them, and chainfiring lasers that burn for 1.25s where they recycle before you are doing firing all of them. If you don't understand why that makes them absolutely worthless then I won't ever be able to get you to understand. That isn't the entire point though, aiming shouldn't be the most difficult thing in this game, and it currently isn't, the biggest deciding factor in most matches is still positioning and basic piloting skills.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

Again, it's an even vs. normal distribution thing. You seem to be talking of the former, while the CoF proponents are talking about the latter.

I get that it is a normal distribution, but if a shot veers into the ST when I aimed at the CT from 400m away and I fired 2 AC5s and it is within the standard deviation, something tells me that spread is too wide.

Look, I get that people hate massive alphas, comp players aren't necessarily a fan, but adding CoF to any alpha ever is not a solution that me or them is going to be a fan of because it ruins weapons that NEED to be boated to be remotely useful, hell lasers for that matter which become much much worse the moment you require them to chainfire a decent length of time to be useful. Not to mention it does take a bit of skill out of it, but meh, I don't feel like trying to argue that one too much further.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 09 February 2016 - 04:41 PM.

[pyrocomp]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

Look, I get that people hate massive alphas, comp players aren't necessarily a fan, but adding CoF to any alpha ever is not a solution that me or them is going to be a fan of because it ruins weapons that NEED to be boated to be remotely useful, hell lasers for that matter which become much much worse the moment you require them to chainfire a decent length of time to be useful.

Ah, I see now where we understand things differently. I see that each weapon has it's own CoF (low, really, like 3-5 m at 800-1000 m) and CoF depend on the state of the mech (heat and movement). Alphas will make the mech hot anyway, so there will be no sense in adding more to it artificially at the shot moment (the recoil is another matter, but firing 4 weapons widdens the CoF only twice that way, or lower, depends on implementation and other things). Again, the heat and movement turns a Mech into 'shotgun' (and that beyond 200-300-400 m depending). The problem is in numbers and how it's implemented. Not in CoF itself it seems.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

pyrocomp, on 09 February 2016 - 04:47 PM, said:

Not in CoF itself it seems.

The problem is, that what people want to happen with alpha strikes, is enough CoF that it isn't as accurate as you describe, finding that happy medium will be harder than simply buffing rapid fire weapons so that mechs oriented towards massive alpha strikes have to be careful.

[pyrocomp]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 04:51 PM, said:

The problem is, that what people want to happen with alpha strikes, is enough CoF that it isn't as accurate as you describe, finding that happy medium will be harder than simply buffing rapid fire weapons so that mechs oriented towards massive alpha strikes have to be careful.

Massive ultrahot alpha will take care of itself if the CoF is heat dependent as most probably it will cut in before the laser beams finish firing (durations will matter more from that point). PPC will have more appeal and may become a new problem.
But all this is purely theoretical and really needs a try on PTS. I get that PGI prefer the 'out-do then partially undo' approach (and I can see why, that's easier to isolate results, if they are linear - not usually the case), but still I think small accurate movement/heat dependent CoF should be tried as the least convoluted and easiest to code (yes, I truly know how much of code it needs, I coded random particle beams) of what I was able to track over the forum. So, in the end, I'm still for the CoF. =)

Edited by pyrocomp, 09 February 2016 - 05:07 PM.

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

I get that it is a normal distribution, but if a shot veers into the ST when I aimed at the CT from 400m away and I fired 2 AC5s and it is within the standard deviation, something tells me that spread is too wide.

Look, I get that people hate massive alphas, comp players aren't necessarily a fan, but adding CoF to any alpha ever is not a solution that me or them is going to be a fan of because it ruins weapons that NEED to be boated to be remotely useful, hell lasers for that matter which become much much worse the moment you require them to chainfire a decent length of time to be useful. Not to mention it does take a bit of skill out of it, but meh, I don't feel like trying to argue that one too much further.

Is a 5% (for example) chance of missing a shot really that fatal, especially if you end up hitting an adjacent panel anyway?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 05:24 PM, said:

Is a 5% (for example) chance of missing a shot really that fatal, especially if you end up hitting an adjacent panel anyway?

I think you missed what I meant, if it happens with any regularity that you miss an intended component, then it won't be as useful at deterring enemies, especially ones pushing (legs tend to be harder to hit).

[Dino Might]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

I get that it is a normal distribution, but if a shot veers into the ST when I aimed at the CT from 400m away and I fired 2 AC5s and it is within the standard deviation, something tells me that spread is too wide.

Look, I get that people hate massive alphas, comp players aren't necessarily a fan, but adding CoF to any alpha ever is not a solution that me or them is going to be a fan of because it ruins weapons that NEED to be boated to be remotely useful, hell lasers for that matter which become much much worse the moment you require them to chainfire a decent length of time to be useful. Not to mention it does take a bit of skill out of it, but meh, I don't feel like trying to argue that one too much further.

This change would not be made in a vacuum (or it should not be). There would need to be additional changes to individual weapon systems and a specific SD set for each weapon. It adds another way to balance weapons. For instance, LPL causing problems, but don't want to change its range, heat, or damage? Bump up its SD. Easy peasy.

It might require some pilots to use more skill to get a little closer to the target to guarantee hit location like they used to be able to do by just pointing and clicking at 800m. That would involve piloting skill, though, and I understand why some of the "pros" wouldn't like that.

[Repasy Cooper]

I think the idea of a COF expanding w/ heat has merit, but only with lasers. Even laser technology today has lens focus technology to pinpoint an irregularly moving target with ease, but obviously if equipment heats up then the system experiences lag. So laser convergence would be based on heat for sure, and even torso mounted lasers would be able to converge on a point.

Autocannons, on the other hand, would be affected more by movement. If you're stationary, your ballistic weapons fire should not be affected at all (minus machine guns and rapid-firing UAC). The faster your mech moves, the larger the cone of ballistics fire should be. There should also be a brief cone increase for each shot. So, if you fire your ballistics all at once, the brief COF increase would be great, and take longer to 'cooldown' back to default COF. Also, if you chain fire your ballistics rapidly, your COF would not have enough time to cool down and shots would become increasingly inaccurate. Furthermore, all torso ballistics should have no convergence as they are fixed. So for gauss snipers, for instance, there would be an inherent advantage to equipping gauss in the arms, as only arm-mounted ballistics would converge on a point target (same goes for PPC, as they are not laser but are particle launchers).

Essentially, I agree with all of your ideas, but I believe that only energy weapon COF should be affected by heat, and only ballistic weapon COF should be affected by movement & rate-of-fire. The exception would be PPC, as although it is listed as an energy weapon it produces recoil and deals damage through thermal & kinetic energy, so it should be affected by heat, movement & rate-of-fire. Gauss too would suffer almost negligible COF change, seeing as magnetic acceleration produces nearly no recoil or heat.

EDIT:

One last point I would like to make is I don't think we should be able to see this COF increase reflected in the hud. I know this is a common feature in most fps, but MechWarrior has always prided itself on the idea of being a Battlemech simulator. In real world, HUD does not have crosshairs with auto-adjusting COF, it is up to the skilled pilot of a tank, fighter or drone to take that into account. So I don't think we need that feature in this game.

Edited by Repasy, 09 February 2016 - 05:54 PM.

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 09 February 2016 - 04:51 PM, said:

The problem is, that what people want to happen with alpha strikes, is enough CoF that it isn't as accurate as you describe, finding that happy medium will be harder than simply buffing rapid fire weapons so that mechs oriented towards massive alpha strikes have to be careful.

Alternatively, you could just double or triple all laser durations.

[pyrocomp]

Mystere, on 09 February 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

Alternatively, you could just double or triple all laser durations.

Will help a bit. For the first 20 minutes after patch. Then there will the backsplash. And I think the polarity and intensity of the reaction will greatly overshot the reaction on Polar. Interesing experiment, but a risky one.