657 replies to this topic

[A Headless Chicken]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 10:06 PM, said:

You're still going to have to aim -- and more importantly take time until you're at pinpoint precision -- or your shots will be spread or wasted entirely.

After all your comments, you're suddenly going to have to worry about this? Why? People with skills should thrive much more than those who don't. Why even change that?

Decent players will always be at the top of the game, but as playstyles and builds get reduced one by one because of your brilliant suggestions (Someone admitted they actually get reduced! Oh my!) plus repeated calls for nerfs for weapons that perform well in this new game scenario from some window-licker, there probably isn't anything left to hold my interest in the videogame.

By the way, where are the beer leagues?

[Tesunie]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 09:54 PM, said:

There is a close approximation to the old delayed convergence: convergence on lock. Most, if not all, of the elements to implement this are already in the game.

My question becomes: How do we get that to "play nice" with HSR? It would be another thing for it to calculate, which is more tax on the system, and I already see shots "go into the aether". Would this (as much as I like it) be practical for the game? Is it worth the trouble?

Now, don't get me wrong. I loved the old delayed convergence and was deeply saddened upon it's removal. I'd love to see it back and do think it would help.

[A Headless Chicken]

Tesunie, on 27 June 2018 - 10:11 PM, said:

With a fire control system, we could have accuracy be determined by how much CPU a weapon takes up. I think it would be obvious that "boating" Gauss would probably tax the fire control CPU. Heat and movement wouldn't be the only things to affect the "bloom" in my theory, each weapon could eat up some of that "accuracy" from the targeting computer.

And so, why would I run a sustained build with rapid fire weapons which cannot replenish CPU fast enough and just use burst damage weapons? You explained the system to me but you are not showing me that it achieves balance. Who would then boat weapons? Who would fully utilize all the hardpoints from a 'Mech? If everyone has shake, what's preventing my 94 alpha + shake peeking from being superior to a sustained DPS AC boat shaking and still being unable to fire on me at all?

Your suggestion can and will change the meta, and you are just giving players more things to complicate the game which I honestly don't think we need, given how not everyone can even comprehend basic mechanics right now.

Edited by A Headless Chicken, 27 June 2018 - 10:22 PM.

[Mystere]

Tesunie, on 27 June 2018 - 10:14 PM, said:

My question becomes: How do we get that to "play nice" with HSR? It would be another thing for it to calculate, which is more tax on the system, and I already see shots "go into the aether". Would this (as much as I like it) be practical for the game? Is it worth the trouble?

Now, don't get me wrong. I loved the old delayed convergence and was deeply saddened upon it's removal. I'd love to see it back and do think it would help.

What happens when you just fired your weapons and someone suddenly steps into your line of fire? How does the game resolve such an occurrence?

With that question in mind, think of the following scenarios in a convergence-on-lock system:

• you have weapons lock
  
• you do not have weapons lock

Is there a difference as far calculating where the "intruder" gets hit?


As I mentioned earlier, most if not all of the elements to get this done are already in the game.

In this example, it will be just as HSR-friendly as everything else that already exists.

Edited by Mystere, 27 June 2018 - 10:24 PM.

[Mystere]

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:21 PM, said:

And so, why would I run a sustained build with rapid fire weapons which cannot replenish CPU fast enough and just use burst damage weapons? You explained the system to me but you are not showing me that it achieves balance. Who would then boat weapons? Who would fully utilize all the hardpoints from a 'Mech? If everyone has shake, what's preventing my 94 alpha + shake peeking from being superior to a sustained DPS AC boat shaking and still being unable to fire on me at all?

I still would.

Let's take the example of a Nova Prime that has six ERMLs on each arm. At worst case, for each arm, the weapons hit pattern is going to maintain the geometry of their relative locations. And considering the Nova is small, and the arms obviously even smaller, you're going to have a nice cluster on each arm. The drawback is, you lose an arm, you lose half your weapons.

Now let's go with your 94-alpha behemoth. What will the weapons hit pattern be at anything less than the ideal?

And that's just weapons. We still have not yet factored in speed, agility, positioning, and other details of the encounter.

[A Headless Chicken]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 10:37 PM, said:

I still would.

Let's take the example of a Nova Prime that has six ERMLs on each arm. At worst case, for each arm, the weapons hit pattern is going to maintain the geometry of their relative locations. And considering the Nova is small, and the arms obviously even smaller, you're going to have a nice cluster on each arm. The drawback is, you lose an arm, you lose half your weapons.

Now let's go with your 94-alpha behemoth. What will the weapons hit pattern be at anything less than the ideal?

And that's just weapons. We still have not yet factored in speed, agility, positioning, and other details of the encounter.

Why play heat intensive ERMLs 6 by 6 and be sure to incur a heat-bloom penalty when i can fire 2 Gauss for little heat and some CPU penalty and then vomit lasers after for a bigger alpha and less aggregate penalty? I'm still playing within Tesunie's rules but I'm still knocking your teeth in because I incur less CPU and a smaller heat penalty for a 94 alpha, while you toast yourself off with your 12 MLs and wash 84 points of damage all over with the brilliant bloom system you have come up with.

As someone who has played the videogame at a mere average level, I feel that your speed, agility and positioning will not matter either if you want to make this comparison, simply because I'm standing still to not incur penalties when shooting you and I still maintain superior damage and range.

Edited by A Headless Chicken, 27 June 2018 - 10:45 PM.

[Mystere]

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:13 PM, said:

Decent players will always be at the top of the game, but as playstyles and builds get reduced one by one because of your brilliant suggestions (Someone admitted they actually get reduced! Oh my!) plus repeated calls for nerfs for weapons that perform well in this new game scenario from some window-licker, there probably isn't anything left to hold my interest in the videogame.

Well, I never made such a statement. So just because someone else "admits" the "possibility" of it happening, does not mean it actually will.

Also, when did I ever care about window lickers?

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:13 PM, said:

By the way, where are the beer leagues?

How and why would I know?

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:43 PM, said:

Why play heat intensive ERMLs 6 by 6 and be sure to incur a heat-bloom penalty when i can fire 2 Gauss for little heat and some CPU penalty and then vomit lasers after for a bigger alpha and less aggregate penalty? I'm still playing within Tesunie's rules but I'm still knocking your teeth in because I incur less CPU and a smaller heat penalty for a 94 alpha, while you toast yourself off with your 12 MLs and wash 84 points of damage all over with the brilliant bloom system you have come up with.

If I shoot you in the cockpit with just the right convergence required, you're dead. Those are my rules.

[Imperius]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 10:45 PM, said:

Well, I never made such a statement. So just because someone else "admits" the "possibility" of it happening, does not mean it actually will.

Also, when did I ever care about window lickers?




How and why would I know?



If I shoot you in the cockpit with just the right convergence required, you're dead. Those are my rules.

If you don’t care about the “window lickers” why are you asking for cone of fire or worried about the 94 point alpha spegettii monster?

[Mystere]

Imperius, on 27 June 2018 - 10:47 PM, said:

If you don’t care about the “window lickers” why are you asking for cone of fire or worried about the 94 point alpha spegettii monster?

Do tell me exactly where I [1] asked for cone of fire and [2] worried about 94-point alphas.

You're definitely mistaking me for someone else.

Edited by Mystere, 27 June 2018 - 10:50 PM.

[A Headless Chicken]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 10:45 PM, said:

Well, I never made such a statement. So just because someone else "admits" the "possibility" of it happening, does not mean it actually will.

Also, when did I ever care about window lickers?

How and why would I know?

If I shoot you in the cockpit with just the right convergence required, you're dead. Those are my rules.

I'm not even saying it as a possibility that playstyles will die. It is a fact that perhaps some people are oblivious to.

I highly doubt the cockpit bit, [redacted]

Edited by Tina Benoit, 30 July 2018 - 05:06 PM.
nonconstructive

[Mystere]

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:50 PM, said:

I'm not even saying it as a possibility that playstyles will die. It is a fact that perhaps some people are oblivious to.

So, the person you claimed to have "admitted" that playstyles will be reduced is no one else but yourself.

A Headless Chicken, on 27 June 2018 - 10:50 PM, said:

I highly doubt the cockpit bit, but you should care about window-lickers because you sure as hell can lick the windows of mine.

Given you've now resorted to ad hominens, It looks like you're the one licking.

Edited by Mystere, 27 June 2018 - 11:32 PM.

[Imperius]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 10:48 PM, said:

Do tell me exactly where I [1] asked for cone of fire and [2] worried about 94-point alphas.

You're definitely mistaking me for someone else.

You’re trying to fix the issue that doesn’t exist (high alpha meta). By spreading the same gospel you’ve been litering the forums with for years.

Copy / Paste into google search
site:mwomercs.com “mystere” = “cone of fire”

As you said before a good investor checks his own facts.

Edited by Imperius, 27 June 2018 - 11:03 PM.

[Mystere]

Imperius, on 27 June 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

You’re trying to fix the issue that doesn’t exist (high alpha meta). By spreading the same gospel you’ve been litering the forums with for years.

Copy / Paste into google search
site:mwomercs.com “mystere” = “cone of fire”

As you said before a good investor checks his own facts l.

If all you did was perform a google search and not actually read -- much less comprehend -- what is written, there is really nothing else to say.

Edited by Mystere, 27 June 2018 - 11:05 PM.

[Imperius]

Mystere, on 27 June 2018 - 11:04 PM, said:

If all you did was perform a google search and not actually read -- much less comprehend -- what is written, there is really nothing else to say.

I think you’re just trolling honestly. Just in case you forgot. Looks pretty much anti-convergence drivel to me.

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__4767658

PostMystere, on 15 October 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:
And I am of the school of convergence. I say have zero weapon convergence when target is not locked. Alternatively, have a fixed convergence point set by player if target is not locked.

[Mystere]

Imperius, on 27 June 2018 - 11:17 PM, said:

I think you’re just trolling honestly. Just in case you forgot. Looks pretty much anti-convergence drivel to me.

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__4767658

PostMystere, on 15 October 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:
And I am of the school of convergence. I say have zero weapon convergence when target is not locked. Alternatively, have a fixed convergence point set by player if target is not locked.

Comprehension is Key. What is implied -- and which you seem to have not picked up -- is that you have convergence when you have the target locked.

Why would I claim otherwise?

Edited by Mystere, 27 June 2018 - 11:26 PM.

[Weeny Machine]

The Lighthouse, on 27 June 2018 - 04:00 PM, said:

The main cause is that PGI firmly believes that increasing TTK will close the gap between good and bad players.


....Pretty much everyone who knows about game design tells us that increasing TTK will WIDEN the gap between good and bad players.

My experience during HoN also tells me same thing. You increase TTK, you will help good players regarding making mistakes, letting them dominating lesser players.


This always boggles my mind that PGI is not only ignorant of this simple fact, but they also refuse to learn from others.

I don't know how you come to that conclusion. I could argue that less skilled players can make mistakes then as well before getting instant gipped and LEARN from it instead of having to start a new game - which lowers the frustration factor quite a bit

Also, I can tell you that staggerred 30 point volleys are still deadly. Just try a Nova SPL boat

Secondly, as I said already before, currently this game is all about armour and firepower (especially high alphas). Speed doesn't play much of a role and more fragile chassis like lights and mediums are simply less played (just look at the QP queue). And the reason for this is that one good alpha can cripple or kill a lot of those chassis.Which is more arcade gameplay than Battletech

The Lighthouse, on 27 June 2018 - 05:20 PM, said:

I am sorry, that is simply not true. A factually false sentence.

Arguing TTK is not something new concept. We were already arguing about 'mistake management' back in Quake 3 era.

TTK absolutely affects skill gaps, and every single FPS community always argues over about the best TTK which could satisfy both high skilled and low skilled players. From other games, there was a very long discussion regarding TTK for Titanfall 2 and recently developers implemented high TTK mode game because of this. And popular games like Battlefield and COD, developers always mangle TTK to provide best experience for all players.


This is one of the good videos explaining the effect of TTK.





[snip] due to insanely high TTK we have right now, and MWO traditionally had already very high TTK.

What weapons do you use? LRMS? If you really think the TTK is insanely high than maybe you should play Call of Duty

Edited by Bush Hopper, 27 June 2018 - 11:35 PM.

[A Headless Chicken]

Imperius, on 27 June 2018 - 11:17 PM, said:

I think you’re just trolling honestly. Just in case you forgot. Looks pretty much anti-convergence drivel to me.

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__4767658

PostMystere, on 15 October 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:
And I am of the school of convergence. I say have zero weapon convergence when target is not locked. Alternatively, have a fixed convergence point set by player if target is not locked.

I figured I should chip in to inform you that it's kind of pointless to argue with someone stuck in a glass bowl. If he could land shots reliably, he wouldn't be against convergence.

[Shaggath]

Before clan introduction the games was in better shape with more variant play and more style.

IS weapon balance is really better.

When gauss is at the top damage on pinpoint and ppc have slightly more damage then large, they have a role.

It's just they **** off all rules and hierarchy with clan lazor.

If they adjust laser damage by folllowing this rules we can retreive something more in line and a better meta :

A weapon have reduce space and tonnage when they do same damage then IS counter part.

A weapon have same space and tonnage when they do more damage then IS counterpart.

Gauss is at the top of the range damage and after ppc and after the heavy large laser.

Heavy medium can't have more damage then large laser

Heavy small can't have more damage then medium.

Actually when people say other clan weapon are bad ... the same weapon with more weight and slot heavily use on IS ARE BAD ???? common sense in all her beauty.

C lazor are just out of bound and eclipse all weapon with pinpoint easy shoot its just all in one.

Back in time they introduce heat penality and gauss mechanic to address 60 pinpoint alpha and this have work now we have the same problem.
With 94 pinpoint alpha the 60 rules only reach by some assault heavy haves slightly drift ....
In fact 94 is the big number but a simple 60 easely do with some laser by lot of clan mech is far more simple then a 60 combo with gauss.
Long range pock have to be with more difficult shoot and dedicate to gauss ppc.

For all stupid argument :

Desync loose of agility : how 5 or 10 % less agility can change the fact "a partial hit of big laser alpha can wreck light part in one hit ...

Up other weapon : at the actual lazor value if we up other weapon to retrieve same hierachy who have work in the past we end with 150 alpha i don't think making mwo instagib is the right way to go, because yes up other weapon make you can make new combo with more high alpha......

We just need to copy paste something who have work in the past INNERSPHERE WEAPON HIERACHY SLIGHTLY SHIFFTED UP FOR CLAN.

(Please don't talk about heavy gauss 200 range 11 slot 18 t and 5 shoot for 1 pack of ammo this work on some assault who end with standard engine brawl with 45 top speed and have 10 shoot 50 alpha pinpoint and also high mrm alpha because is not really pinpoint).

Edited by Shaggath, 28 June 2018 - 02:31 AM.

[The Lighthouse]

Bush Hopper, on 27 June 2018 - 11:24 PM, said:

I don't know how you come to that conclusion. I could argue that less skilled players can make mistakes then as well before getting instant gipped and LEARN from it instead of having to start a new game - which lowers the frustration factor quite a bit

Also, I can tell you that staggerred 30 point volleys are still deadly. Just try a Nova SPL boat

Secondly, as I said already before, currently this game is all about armour and firepower (especially high alphas). Speed doesn't play much of a role and more fragile chassis like lights and mediums are simply less played (just look at the QP queue). And the reason for this is that one good alpha can cripple or kill a lot of those chassis.Which is more arcade gameplay than Battletech




What weapons do you use? LRMS? If you really think the TTK is insanely high than maybe you should play Call of Duty

Yes, less skilled players also make mistakes, except problem is they make far more mistakes (thus they are called "unskilled" Another problem is that skilled players can cover their mistake far better than less-skilled players.

Thus, the benefit does not apply in flat percentage. The mech's total health is limited, and there is so much increased health can cover before people die from mistakes. Let us look at hypothetical example:


Let's say average match lasts 15 minutes. A skilled player makes 1 mistake per 3 minutes, while a unskilled one makes 1 mistake per 1 minute. Let's say each mistake costs 10 health. Let's also say currently the mech's health is 30. Let's say both players receive same damage to sake of simplifying calculation.

With 30 health, and ignoring damage received, the skilled player will die at 9 min mark, while the unskilled will die at 3 min mark if we only apply health loss due to mistakes. So PGI looks at it and decided to 'help' the unskilled player by buffing the mech's health to 50. Now the skilled player pretty much won't die until the end of the match (15 min) even if he/she makes mistakes. However, the unskilled player will die at 5 min mark, about 2 min increase of his/her lifespan during the match.

Even if we assume both mechs from each player do same amount of damage, the benefit received by the skilled player due to higher TTK is so much more than the lower player, because the skilled player gained total of 6 minutes while the unskilled player only gained total of 2 minutes. Even if we assume both players deal same damage to enemies at same time period, the skilled player has gained three times more damage than the unskilled player due to TTK increase.

Of course, in real situation, this is hardly remotely close, since the skilled player WILL do MORE damage and receive LESS damage than the unskilled player at the same time period, which further severely deepens benefit imbalance from TTK increase. Unless you crank TTK to extreme, say make the mech's health to 150, then both players will get same benefit. Except at that point the game is broken.



Finally, I don't use LRMs, and I think you should not tell me what build to use when you don't use that build yourself. If you truly had played Nova SPL boat, you would not tell me it does staggered 30 point volley, right?

Edited by The Lighthouse, 28 June 2018 - 12:32 AM.

[A Headless Chicken]

The Lighthouse, on 28 June 2018 - 12:31 AM, said:

Let's say average match lasts 15 minutes. A skilled player makes 1 mistake per 3 minutes, while a unskilled one makes 1 mistake per 1 minute. Let's say each mistake costs 10 health. Let's also say currently the mech's health is 30. Let's say both players receive same damage to sake of simplifying calculation.

Misconception of the game as a whole. One mistake on either side will tilt the scales to favor their opponent. It's just that the skilled player is horribly unlikely to make that mistake - or he makes it and survives.