Vrbas, on 21 November 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:
Who's that aimed at, or were you looking for a different "can't tell if" meme?
Snib, on 21 November 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:
All that would prove is that there were 4 terrible players in streak cats.
I contend that four terrible players in Streakcats, working together, would still manage a kill or two between them. The point of Streaks is that they don't really require much skill to use well, yes?
Quote
Which is an average and may vary by the total length of time that an asset's output is measured over, yes. To wit: Let's say I can sustain a hypothetical DPS of 50 for ten seconds in my mouse-a-pult, but then for the next ten seconds I must drop off to 25 DPS in order to avoid overheating. After that, in my next ten seconds, I can ramp back up to the full 50 again, and so on. If I repeat this pattern, I can sustain fire for two minutes before I run out of ammo.
--In a 10-second fight, my DPS is 50.
--In a 20-second fight, my DPS is 37.5
--In a 35-second fight, my DPS is 34.375
--In a three minute fight, my DPS is 25.
DPS is meaningless because it's a value without context. Even if the time interval is known, it's still not a very useful calculation when it can be artifically adjusted by other inputs and must contend with other factors (such as heat).
Quote
Why would you compare a full mech loadout to half a loadout? Anyway, 6 SSRM2 can cause up to 90 damage within 10 seconds, exactly the same as 2 Gauss. But then a Gaussapult typically runs 2 ML in addition.
I'm not sure a pair of MLs constitutes "half" of a Gausscat, but if your numbers are correct then my point is made anyway: both setups make a theoretical 90 DPS over a 10-second interval, with the difference being that one of those setups will routinely achieve actual working numbers closer to that ideal than the other, as Dimento is about to explain:
Dimento Graven, on 21 November 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:
Irrelevant as a gauss rifle hits from over 1000m, ALWAYS hits for full force, is not affected by AMS, requires no lock to hit.
All true, but these factors are mitigated by the need to actually aim the weapons. The fatal flaw of almost every system of machines is that there's a human operator at one end of it, and Gauss Rifles are no different. Gauss Rifles hit from long range, very hard, and can't be intercepted... but they don't always hit to begin with. Streaks do, or at least do in the ideal conditions of our little thought experiment here. Real-world performance numbers are obviously going to differ, but my strong suspicion is that Streaks will come out significantly ahead of Gauss Rifles.
Quote
No, like you're trying to compensate for the vibration of the hits. You can still aim through missle, AC, gauss shake, if the target and you are moving in predictable manner, just continue the smooth mouse movements you would if you weren't being shaken. The cockpit shake doesn't alter the location of where you're aiming in the least. It's an effect that is meant to disorient you.
I'll pay closer attention in future games, assuming I can get past my framerate issues. This isn't what I've observed, but when I'm being pelted by incoming ordnance paying close attention to whether or not my shots are still following my crosshair is typically not my top priority.
Quote
Agreed, it's a bad idea, especially since the missles come out the front. Approach from the sides or rear and none of the streak carriers weapons are a problem.
Except in circumstances when the Streakcat in question is faster than you are, which is a situation I run into often at the moment. I also lack the Alpha capability necessary to take a Catapult's arm off in one strike.
Quote
This is not a bad idea actually. A lighter target has a lower mass ratio and therefore should suffer greater rocking. I like it.
That one's filed under "pipe dreams", honestly. I've been suggesting it for months now, but it'd be a pain in the *** to code in for something with a negligible effect on gameplay.
Quote
I disagree with this, I doubt my GPU is any better than yours. My PC is apparently near the "minimal" specs required to run this game. I never get above 15fps, but that won't be something I have to live with forever, I'll upgrade soon, so why put in a patch that will actually benefit those people already on a more modern machine more capable of handling the shakes? Screw 'em I say.
I sit around 20 on a clear field, drop into the mid-teens in a heavy fight, and single digits when missiles start landing anywhere in the same zipcode as my cockpit.
My point was that my framerates and associated troubles have gotten better over time with PGI's continuing optimizing, and that they need to keep improving the game in this regard in order for the game to succeed. Games that only bleeding-edge machines can run tend to sell poorly (Crysis comes to mind... and oh look, MWO runs on a descendant of the engine Crysis used).
10
