1094 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

Convergence is a dead child, because convergence would have to take server client inaccuracy into account. (otherwise if client sided could be cheated). Convergence would also create massive balance issues due to how hadpointdistribution between different mechs are.

A cone of fire would be the only option of a rather steadily working abstract simulation of "convergence". Funnily the JJ's aready have a kind of simulator of this, just with the twitchy crosshair. It will still bring some balance issues because mechs hitboxes are not like in human shooters, and some mechs will have hitboxes where a cone of fire makes them tanks (think SCR) and others still with cone of fire just easy pray (enter random oversized CT mech of choice)

I still think limiting heat is an important factor to still limit strange oversized alphastrikes.

Edited by Lily from animove, 12 February 2016 - 02:19 AM.

[Greyhart]

smokefield, on 11 February 2016 - 03:10 AM, said:

ac hit in the same spot ONLY if you and the target are stationary...which is almost never the case. In normal situations AC's spread damage. And clan ones more because of multiple bullets. You want to add to this another random hit or miss dice roll ? rofl ?

lasers hit in the same spot ONLY if you and the target are stationary..which is almost never the case. In normal situations they spread damage cause they deliver the maximum damage in time and are not full damage insta hit. (except ppcs that spread damage in game built in feature ). No one will be able to keep the beam in the exact same spot if you MOVE. you want to add another dice roll for this too ? why ? just learn to move.

missles - do i need to point how much damage they spread ? do we need another random hit/miss to missles ?

Actually I wasn't making any point, just asking a question. however, your highly defensive response makes me think you think I was making a point.

However lasers have the least spread on a moving target as you are able to track the target (although the target has an opportunity to spread the damage by being in a place that the firer did not expect). Ballistics and missiles however have no opportunity to adjust the shot after it is taken.

the spread on ballastics and missiles would make a case (if you were to introduce a CoF) of not being effected by the cone of fire,

Of course another way to deal with it would be to widen the laser beam so that it didn't hit a single pixel but an area.

Actually if the laser started very wide then narrowed to a single pixel at max range it would make in interesting mechanic for differences between close and long range lasers. So an ERLL would be a massive area on things close in but accurate on things a long way away

Edited by Greyhart, 11 February 2016 - 03:33 AM.

[smokefield]

it was directed at this not you :

Quote

ACs hit exactly where you aim them, same with lasers.... Missiles are random, and that's why they can't compete with the first two...

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quote

Yeah, just like real life. Given a Glock in any shooter, you wouldn't whine because you missed a 1000m shot even though your aim was dead on, and especially if you were sprinting off a ledge. Because it's exactly what would happen in real life. We're just asking for an extra bit of simulation to be added. Of course not WoT awful, but a little bit could do this game good.

a human being is not breathing
a human being has no muscle tremble
a mech aims not by having to hold the weapon in front of the cockpit with his arm
a mech is a tank on legs
but brings into play weapon damage (weapon is damage inaccurat)
Pilot damage (worse vision, fainting, or very little disturbance by injury, falls, loss of balance)

[pyrocomp]

Greyhart, on 11 February 2016 - 03:23 AM, said:

Actually if the laser started very wide then narrowed to a single pixel at max range it would make in interesting mechanic for differences between close and long range lasers. So an ERLL would be a massive area on things close in but accurate on things a long way away

Unfortunately large area spot won't get it. It is either random damage placement in that area (keep in mind server side) or plitting the laser beam into several randomly distributed and raytracing them (server will start to melt, they for this very reason track missles in volleys, not individually). Both are in effect CoF with less transparent behavior.

Old MW4 Ranger, on 11 February 2016 - 03:44 AM, said:

a human being is not breathing
a human being has no muscle tremble
a mech aims not by having to hold the weapon in front of the cockpit with his arm
a mech is a tank on legs
but brings into play weapon damage (weapon is damage inaccurat)
Pilot damage (worse vision, fainting, or very little disturbance by injury, falls, loss of balance)

Add recoil to the list.

[Greyhart]

pyrocomp, on 11 February 2016 - 04:24 AM, said:

Unfortunately large area spot won't get it. It is either random damage placement in that area (keep in mind server side) or plitting the laser beam into several randomly distributed and raytracing them (server will start to melt, they for this very reason track missles in volleys, not individually). Both are in effect CoF with less transparent behavior.

What if you were to simply turn them into reverse shot guns with each point of damage having its own pixel and would fire straight rather than random.

so a ML would be 5 lasers combined into one with a fixed convergence range.

Probably too much work but i find it all an interesting idea.

[DiGCliff]

I mean wot has a reticle bloom and it has a very active high skill player component. I honestly don't see why the op's suggestion is so out of left field I like it.

[pyrocomp]

Greyhart, on 11 February 2016 - 04:38 AM, said:

What if you were to simply turn them into reverse shot guns with each point of damage having its own pixel and would fire straight rather than random.

so a ML would be 5 lasers combined into one with a fixed convergence range.

Probably too much work but i find it all an interesting idea.

Same 5 independent raytracers as each sub-beam may het the obstacle while others will pass. One of the things behind current laser beam diminishing at max distance was to limit the number of steps to raytrace them to make less calulations per beam to ease the server. So multiplying the number of calculations is not a viable option currently due to simple technical reasons. More servers need to have less matches per server? Or cut RoFs in half.

[DoctorDetroit]

I support changes to the heat system to lower high alphas or increases in laser duration to limit pin point laser vomit. Buffing LBX would also be a big part in giving alternatives to pinpoint damage weapons.

I think the cone of fire system would cause too much strife among players and I know I will curse up a storm as soon as the random number generator takes away a perfectly setup kill shot from me. The proposed idea would reward camping and stagnation and thus kill one of the best parts about this game, mobility and flanking tactics.

I find it funny that the pro CoF crowd thinks perfectly accurate shots are the norm. When you watch competive matches with the best players in the game, you see that most damage is pretty spread around the mechs. Why if it is so easy to pinpoint, do the top players not simply insta core each other out? Clearly it is skill to keep your mech alive and fighting. This is a concept the CoF ppl arent acknowledging. This is the skill nerf that is most transparent by adding a random number generator.

[Greyhart]

what if instead of a cone of fire or fixed convergence if no lock the convergence became less by fixed amounts with certain factors.

for example if you have no lock the convergence point is calculated as 10m behind your current target. (if locked then convergence is perfect or fixed to current target).

If you are above X heat your convergence point is a further 10m behind the target.

And on and on with what ever factors you like.

This isn't random and would be controllable but would "simulate" the fact that the computer is doing stuff on the fly and is slightly inaccurate, but not so inaccurate.

[pyrocomp]

DoctorDetroit, on 11 February 2016 - 05:00 AM, said:

I find it funny that the pro CoF crowd thinks perfectly accurate shots are the norm. When you watch competive matches with the best players in the game, you see that most damage is pretty spread around the mechs. Why if it is so easy to pinpoint, do the top players not simply insta core each other out? Clearly it is skill to keep your mech alive and fighting. This is a concept the CoF ppl arent acknowledging. This is the skill nerf that is most transparent by adding a random number generator.

Do not mess all 4 ERLLs hitting with same pixel in one shot with hitting same pixel with 4 consecutive ERLL shots on moving target. First is a blight, second is a skill. Pro CoF crowd finds getting rid of the first sufficient a reason to scarifice the second. I think both crowds can get into agreement that if all weapons were targeted to their respective crosshairs (a cloud shown on the HUD, use it if you can) that will settle the dispute. But this mechanic will fuel another strife as whether those multuple crosshairs hould be fixed (and why so) or should they float movement/heat/recoil dependant (and as with delayed convergence this is now technically vetoed by PGI).

Edited by pyrocomp, 11 February 2016 - 05:23 AM.

[DoctorDetroit]

Greyhart, on 11 February 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

what if instead of a cone of fire or fixed convergence if no lock the convergence became less by fixed amounts with certain factors.

for example if you have no lock the convergence point is calculated as 10m behind your current target. (if locked then convergence is perfect or fixed to current target).

If you are above X heat your convergence point is a further 10m behind the target.

And on and on with what ever factors you like.

This isn't random and would be controllable but would "simulate" the fact that the computer is doing stuff on the fly and is slightly inaccurate, but not so inaccurate.

Because with the system you propose, nothing besides short range brawling would be viable. Lock on mechanics would need a total rework of the sensor detection and ecm system. Pgi has issues with doing this right now. Personally I feel long range sniping and medium range skirmishing should be viable playstyles in certain circumstances. What issue are you trying to fix with this idea?

[LordKnightFandragon]

DiGCliff, on 11 February 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

I mean wot has a reticle bloom and it has a very active high skill player component. I honestly don't see why the op's suggestion is so out of left field I like it.

WoT's RNG is way off in left field, they took the RNG way to far...+ - 25%, it feels like + - 235% when you get in game. When 12mm of armor is full on stopping 276 pen, repeatedly. When you catch a 260 health tank in the side with a 320 damage gun and roll a 258......

Yeah, WOT has the kind of RNG that I can feel for people when they say they dont want an RNG in this game. Everyone is in sheer terror of the WoT RNG remanifesting itself anywhere else.

But really, just like the because the Clans are OP in TT, doesnt mean they are here, same thing with the RNG/CoF. Just because WOT was terrible, doesnt mean one here would be as well.

[Electron Junkie]

I still say each body part needs its own cone of fire (convergence #1) with in a larger main cone of fire (convergence #2) and that their overall convergence (#2) should increase only with slower movement (both mech speed and arm/torso speed) of said weapon systems. For the life of me still can't understand why our crosshairs don't jostle around as we lumber through the battlefield. Even with future tech you aren't going to put extra wear and tear on components by having them hold convergence on range by having then reposition themselves constantly as we sweep the landscape while aiming. (I still think that PGI was on the right track with the laser range nerf/mod just that it needed to be overall convergence.

[DoctorDetroit]

LordKnightFandragon, on 11 February 2016 - 05:35 AM, said:

WoT's RNG is way off in left field, they took the RNG way to far...+ - 25%, it feels like + - 235% when you get in game. When 12mm of armor is full on stopping 276 pen, repeatedly. When you catch a 260 health tank in the side with a 320 damage gun and roll a 258......

Yeah, WOT has the kind of RNG that I can feel for people when they say they dont want an RNG in this game. Everyone is in sheer terror of the WoT RNG remanifesting itself anywhere else.

But really, just like the because the Clans are OP in TT, doesnt mean they are here, same thing with the RNG/CoF. Just because WOT was terrible, doesnt mean one here would be as well.

This has been pointed out before, but I will repeat it. An extremely low percentage of missed shots due to CoF, would anger everyone less than WoT level. However it will have a minimal effect on high alpha or pinpoint dmg. Why even play with a system that only guarantees greater motivation to camp that may or may not actually fix the high alpha pinpoint problem based on what distribution of shots your random number generator works with.

Normal weapon balancing with xml files will solve high alpha and lesson pinpoint without the randomness factor people hate. Plus it is much easier to implement. We have received very little weapon balancing with the xml files. Especially when you consider how easy and quick it would be to implement.

Electron Junkie, on 11 February 2016 - 05:57 AM, said:

I still say each body part needs its own cone of fire (convergence #1) with in a larger main cone of fire (convergence #2) and that their overall convergence (#2) should increase only with slower movement (both mech speed and arm/torso speed) of said weapon systems. For the life of me still can't understand why our crosshairs don't jostle around as we lumber through the battlefield. Even with future tech you aren't going to put extra wear and tear on components by having them hold convergence on range by having then reposition themselves constantly as we sweep the landscape while aiming. (I still think that PGI was on the right track with the laser range nerf/mod just that it needed to be overall convergence.

Again this promotes CAMPING! Why do we want to make the game less mobile?

Edited by DoctorDetroit, 11 February 2016 - 06:11 AM.

[Electron Junkie]

Sitting still in this game still equals a quick death and with the latest movement nerfs no one who camps tend make much of a difference in the overall match other than dragging it out. Killing instant convergence will save the game and drive up the length of the matches in actually play time.

[Hotthedd]

DoctorDetroit, on 11 February 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

Again this promotes CAMPING! Why do we want to make the game less mobile?

No, it only promotes camping if you want to pinpoint alpha strike. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, there would now be a risk associated with that reward.

[adamts01]

Greyhart, on 11 February 2016 - 03:05 AM, said:

I am just wanting to know what is in game at the moment.

i.e. on ballistics the convergence point is calculated at what is under the cross-hairs and not at the mech that "runs" into the shot.

smokefield, on 11 February 2016 - 03:10 AM, said:

ac hit in the same spot ONLY if you and the target are stationary...which is almost never the case. In normal situations AC's spread damage.

Excellent point guys. I honestly typically run lights and mediums where ballistics don't work as well as missiles and lasers so I somehow haven't thought of that in 3 years. I still think a dual gauss mech shouldn't pinpoint a CT from 600m while mid air after sprinting off a cliff.

Old MW4 Ranger, on 11 February 2016 - 03:44 AM, said:

a human being is not breathing
a human being has no muscle tremble
a mech aims not by having to hold the weapon in front of the cockpit with his arm
a mech is a tank on legs
but brings into play weapon damage (weapon is damage inaccurat)
Pilot damage (worse vision, fainting, or very little disturbance by injury, falls, loss of balance)

I'm sorry, I completey missed what you're trying to say.

DoctorDetroit, on 11 February 2016 - 05:00 AM, said:

I find it funny that the pro CoF crowd thinks perfectly accurate shots are the norm. When you watch competive matches with the best players in the game, you see that most damage is pretty spread around the mechs. Why if it is so easy to pinpoint, do the top players not simply insta core each other out? Clearly it is skill to keep your mech alive and fighting. This is a concept the CoF ppl arent acknowledging.

I do like to use the comp crowd as an example, they're great at figuring out what's broken in the game. But, 99% of the population dies by getting cored out when they die, at least when I kill people. I go up against many players better than myself and usually bring my Cheetah, Blackjack or Timby. I think what they do is absolutely broken.

[smokefield]

gauss is not part of AC stuff man.

[DoctorDetroit]

adamts01, on 11 February 2016 - 06:41 AM, said:

I do like to use the comp crowd as an example, they're great at figuring out what's broken in the game. But, 99% of the population dies by getting cored out when they die, at least when I kill people. I go up against many players better than myself and usually bring my Cheetah, Blackjack or Timby. I think what they do is absolutely broken.

Well of course most mechs die from losing their CT... that is obvious. However, if you are trying to say most mechs are brought down by focusing the CT only without damage spread, you are a liar. Mechs are typically stripped of arms and torsos before losing their CT in all games I have played. This is probably because most players actually have really bad aim, even with pinpoint lasers.