1094 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 February 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

Considering some of the best mechs boat at most 8-9 weapons (and mainly due to ghost heat thresholds, otherwise it would be less), I don't understand why you are bringing up 16 like it is an egregious problem running rampant through this game.

Hell, some weapons need to be boated on that scale to actually be useful (iSL I'm looking at you).

I mentioned 16 because it is the maximum. And even if it's only 8 or 9:

Quote

... a wildly swaying reticule that still somehow manages to give pixel-perfect accuracy to potentially 16(?) 8/9 weapons of possibly varying weights in TONS really just offends my sensibilities.

In other words, it does not change a thing. You're just nitpicking.

[East Indy]

Regardless of whether I agree or think it can be done, this is thorough and thoughtful. Really impressive.

[SQW]

tortuousGoddess, on 08 February 2016 - 05:19 PM, said:

No luck rolls modifying my aim, thanks. I'll go play D&D if I want to roll for accuracy.

Weapon fire rates are far too low and time to kill is far too high for that kind of randomizing to be acceptable. CoF is accepted in many FPS games because you're firing 10-15 rounds a second and only have to land 3 to kill. You want to make my 5 second CD Gauss miss its mark at random when I'm trying to have a decent fight? No. Stop trying to ruin this game. Into the dumpster with this idea, along with all the other awful CoF posts.

1. You sound like a twitchy ADHD teenager when you claim current TTK is too long. 5sec is too long!!!!!! Go try Hawken.

2. The COF proposal is not going make you randomly miss shots - it's about having a degree of variation so a laser boat alpha is not going to hit the same pixel but spread out enough to distribute damage across a wider area.

3. COF means you can't solo as much anymore and need better team work so a higher concentration of fire through team work is needed for a quick kill. THAT is what Battletech game is all about and not just high K/D ratio.

[DoctorDetroit]

wanderer, on 08 February 2016 - 05:33 PM, said:

Then the game isn't skill-based. It's "who can put the biggest number on the pixel", with the majority of the weapons are useless for the purposes of skilled play (as they fail to do so, such as missiles, half the ballistics, etc.).

You've just said the game is "competitive" and yet half the game's weapon systems fail to be useful in competition. Which is it?

While I agree that more weapons should be made viable. I think you are being a bit reductionist about the game play, This is not rock, paper, scissors. There is a great deal of tactical positioning that effect matches. SRMs trump laser vomit at short range. So.. clearly pinpoint isnt the absolute pinnacle of competitive game play.

[adamts01]

tortuousGoddess, on 08 February 2016 - 05:39 PM, said:

CoF is a lowering of the skill cap, where the randomness of your shots determines who wins a duel rather than piloting and aiming skill.

Varying COF, depending on stuff. It can be eliminated by proper piloting. It would absolutely require more skill.

[Kill Dozer]

I have to disagree with this idea in the strongest possible terms.

I appreciate the effort you put into this post however.

[Ratpoison]

SQW, on 08 February 2016 - 05:41 PM, said:

1. You sound like a twitchy ADHD teenager when you claim current TTK is too long. 5sec is too long!!!!!! Go try Hawken.

2. The COF proposal is not going make you randomly miss shots - it's about having a degree of variation so a laser boat alpha is not going to hit the same pixel but spread out enough to distribute damage across a wider area.

3. COF means you can't solo as much anymore and need better team work so a higher concentration of fire through team work is needed for a quick kill. THAT is what Battletech game is all about and not just high K/D ratio.

The irony in #1 made the next two not worth reading. Garbage reasons for garbage dice rolls, I'm sure.

[adamts01]

tortuousGoddess, on 08 February 2016 - 05:47 PM, said:

The irony in #1 made the next two not worth reading. Garbage reasons for garbage dice rolls, I'm sure.

Not a dice roll when you're in direct control how much accuracy you'd lose.

[Ratpoison]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 05:46 PM, said:

Varying COF, depending on stuff. It can be eliminated by proper piloting. It would absolutely require more skill.

Absolutely not, with how long it takes to stop and with how vulnerable it makes you, the only good option will be camping so your opponent has to take the accuracy debuff to advance, thus they can't counterattack. It's a horrifyingly bad idea. You're PUNISHING good piloting, not encouraging it.

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 05:48 PM, said:

Not a dice roll when you're in direct control how much accuracy you'd lose.

Incorrect, encouraging me to pilot like an idiot doesn't make it less of a dice roll. Still have to hope I hit the right component otherwise I die from my own cooldowns. Brilliant plan.

[Mystere]

K1ttykat, on 08 February 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

Nope. Cone of fire on evetything in mwo is an irredeemably bad idea. No amount of pictures or details make it better.

You could at least say why instead of handvium.

[DiabetesOverlord Wilford Brimley]

We need an engine upgrade, collisions, single player (added revenue stream), and knockdowns before we even look at convergence, so 2020?

Edited by DiabetesOverlord Wilford Brimley, 08 February 2016 - 05:58 PM.

[Dagorlad13]

Hell NO! People keep advocating this Call Of Duty style RNG because they get so butthurt by the fact that some people can aim better than others (excluding cheaters, I agree that cheaters are bad for the game), please keep aiming skill based.

[1453 R]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 05:48 PM, said:

Not a dice roll when you're in direct control how much accuracy you'd lose.

It is absolutely a dice roll, and as Goddess pointed out it's one slanted heavily in favor of the stationary Whale waiting for his shot. You're basically advocating that mobile shoot-and-move units lose the ability to shoot. Don't people complain about chickens**t idiot teammates who can't properly push to (literally) save their lives often enough?

Seriously, though. Regardless of whether you're rolling a d6 or a d100, you're still rolling dice. Sure, you can claim that lowering the dice count is a matter of skill, and it may very well be. But it doesn't change the fact that your ability to hit your target, to avoid enemy fire, or to win trades/fights is now in the hands of the Cosmos, and not in the hands of the player.

[MechaBattler]

I'm fine with it. Let's do it.

[Mystere]

DoctorDetroit, on 08 February 2016 - 04:27 PM, said:

Nope! Cone of fire is a terrible idea. Nerf laser duration if pinpoint vomit is such a problem. No need for a convoluted game mechanic like cone of fire. Especially when it would take up mucho game resources, while also causing "another" much bigger mass exodus of players.

Did someone go fishing? There are a lot of red herrings being thrown around today.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 08 February 2016 - 05:39 PM, said:

I mentioned 16 because it is the maximum. And even if it's only 8 or 9:

Well if we are talking poptart era, we would only be talking 2-3 per mech. Some weapons need to be boated to be useful, and if you can't boat them effectively then what is the point in the weapons?

[Mystere]

DoctorDetroit, on 08 February 2016 - 04:50 PM, said:

Realistic.... nope, try again. If you shoot a gun, and especially a LASER it goes straight!

Now carry a 6-ton laser while running and see how straight you can hold the beam.

[Ratpoison]

Mystere, on 08 February 2016 - 05:56 PM, said:

You could at least say why instead of handvium.

There really isn't a point. Not only have convergence threads been brought up and smacked down as bad ideas countless times already, but the people pushing for them now are too wrapped up in pushing their own ideal "Battletech" experience to care about the health of the game's competitive potential. There aren't even real gameplay reasons being given anymore, it's just false promises to smash the current meta(and ignorantly replace it with another that's ten times stronger), and "but my REALISM!!!"

Go away. This isn't your personal Battletech fantasy paradise where everything strictly follows lore and real world physics. This is a competitive MechWarrior game for ALL of us, where player skill is placed against player skill in simulated Battletech style combat scenarios, and that means randomizers messing up your ability to deal location damage will never be acceptable.

[adamts01]

What it comes down to is the simulator crowd vs the e-sports crowd. I'd be perfectly happy with a realistic simulator and letting the Counterstrike kids take their saved lunch money somewhere else. I'm sure myself and the actual Mechwarrior fans would more than make up for their financial contribution if this became the massive simulator everyone was promised during funding.

tortuousGoddess, on 08 February 2016 - 06:07 PM, said:

There really isn't a point. Not only have convergence threads been brought up and smacked down as bad ideas countless times already, but the people pushing for them now are too wrapped up in pushing their own ideal "Battletech" experience to care about the health of the game's competitive potential. There aren't even real gameplay reasons being given anymore, it's just false promises to smash the current meta(and ignorantly replace it with another that's ten times stronger), and "but my REALISM!!!"

Go away. This isn't your personal Battletech fantasy paradise where everything strictly follows lore and real world physics. This is a competitive MechWarrior game for ALL of us, where player skill is placed against player skill in simulated Battletech style combat scenarios, and that means randomizers messing up your ability to deal location damage will never be acceptable.

LoL is competitive, Dota is competitive, Starcraft is competitive..... Please stop calling MWO competitive. Even if we disagree on COF, stop pretending this game is competitive.

[1453 R]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 06:07 PM, said:

What it comes down to is the simulator crowd vs the e-sports crowd. I'd be perfectly happy with a realistic simulator and letting the Counterstrike kids take their saved lunch money somewhere else. I'm sure myself and the actual Mechwarrior fans would more than make up for their financial contribution if this became the massive simulator everyone was promised during funding.

Seriously?

Simply because some players don't want to see enormous, unpredictable, uncontrollable swings in their point-of-aim, suddenly we're all a bunch of overcaffeinated twitch-kiddy idiots Ruining Ur BattleTech™?

Ye know, up until now I'd at least respected your position on the matter, but if this is what it boils down to for you, then I guess it really doesn't matter anymore. Sure. Fine. Make it impossible to aim and ensure all the nasty neighbor kids and Steam folks get off your lawn.

See what happens.