57 replies to this topic

[HC Harlequin]

To make things worse... you can't target anywhere as well as you used to do so even using your primary target as the convergence won't work. we really need a mechanical convergence

[Line Animal]

Solis Obscuri, on 26 November 2012 - 01:50 PM, said:

I'm not a huge fan of knockdown and other "stun" effects - let's leave the cheese behind with MW4.

I love that "The Cheese" liked this post. Looks like it's here to stay

[F lan Ker]

S!

I support the convergence being more or less automated IF a target is LOCKED. You still have to lead the target and aim for the spot you want to hit, but no more shots going off-screen etc. because the pipper decides it is on something 5000m away and the target 200m in front of you. Without a lock either keep convergence working as it is now or add an adjustable convergence value either in MechLab or on the fly in combat. Would help some in ECM environment where there is not targeting information available.

Lasers still are pinpoint weapons, the convergence adjustment would put the ballistics somewhere between lasers and missiles, more accurate than missiles yet requiring more aiming for maximum damage, but no pinpoint accuracy like lasers have. I would say more balanced.

[HC Harlequin]

Digging this poll back up to look at weapon balance issues again.

[One Medic Army]

I suggested the "set convergence to range to target" thing a while back, as have several others. Suffice to say the Devs know about it, and I keep hoping they do it.

I'd be interested in having chain-gun variants of the various autocannons, however they'd need some sort of buff relative to make up for the lack of concentrated damage and the need to hold a stream on target. On the plus side it'd add some more variety to ballistics.

[GalaxyBluestar]

too early to call this one.

wait for major fixes to the game mechanics before we decide on niche effects. cause we don't want to buff stuff up to neutral and then have a big nerf fest when laggy teleporting is history and said guns become weapon of op choice. already ac20 and gauss kinda have that status few people use anything different so lets just hold back on the perks discussion until later.

maybe when knockdowns are running perfectly with hitred netcode etc etc.

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 17 January 2013 - 02:25 AM.

[ConnorSinclair]

24 people voted for no knock down?

My faith in humanity is dwindling fast.

[HC Harlequin]

One Medic Army, on 17 January 2013 - 02:20 AM, said:

I suggested the "set convergence to range to target" thing a while back, as have several others. Suffice to say the Devs know about it, and I keep hoping they do it.

I'd be interested in having chain-gun variants of the various autocannons, however they'd need some sort of buff relative to make up for the lack of concentrated damage and the need to hold a stream on target. On the plus side it'd add some more variety to ballistics.

I think one problem I have is even if you set the range to ballistic convergence to be your target, what about ECM? You already can't actually aim at your target to hit, if the range is adjusted to your target then what if you can't target?

[Typatty]

If you included knockdown, you would have ridiculously overpowered situations where a mech 1 shoots mech 2, mech 2 is knocked down, mech 1 continues to shoot mech 2 until mech 2 is dead before he can get back up and react.

It would be more unbalanced than cravens.

[HC Harlequin]

Typatty, on 17 January 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

If you included knockdown, you would have ridiculously overpowered situations where a mech 1 shoots mech 2, mech 2 is knocked down, mech 1 continues to shoot mech 2 until mech 2 is dead before he can get back up and react.

It would be more unbalanced than cravens.

On one hand, from TT, It was a consistant reward for effective fire contol. But the mech had a chance to get up before you could fire again. On the other hand from MW3/4, you are absolutely right. Dual UAC20's on a 100 ton XL 400 atlas with jump jets was a bit over the top, especially since, with respawns, you didn't have to worry about player skill at all. you just run up, open up with the UAC 20's.. kill the guy and take a chunk out of someone else, die, respawn, rinse and repeat.

[HC Harlequin]

Keep voting

[Kurshuk]

I like the idea of a range set to target, but maybe make it a toggle or push and hold to activate. Maybe in reverse. So say you target an enemy at 200m, your convergence snaps to 200m no matter where you aim, but then one of those dirty House Liao people pops up 750m away on a hill and you want to let them know that they've made an error, so you swing your LL over to that target and hold down the __ key which as long as it's held down makes convergence work like it does now, convergence slides to whatever range the pip is on. That way when you're brawling you're brawling and not worrying about how the game is going to throw your limited ammo and hopes and dreams across the MWO landscape and when you're not you have the ability to fire on non-targeted mechs.

Anyone else think this would have merit?


Kurshuk

[HC Harlequin]

Kurshuk, on 18 January 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

I like the idea of a range set to target, but maybe make it a toggle or push and hold to activate. Maybe in reverse. So say you target an enemy at 200m, your convergence snaps to 200m no matter where you aim, but then one of those dirty House Liao people pops up 750m away on a hill and you want to let them know that they've made an error, so you swing your LL over to that target and hold down the __ key which as long as it's held down makes convergence work like it does now, convergence slides to whatever range the pip is on. That way when you're brawling you're brawling and not worrying about how the game is going to throw your limited ammo and hopes and dreams across the MWO landscape and when you're not you have the ability to fire on non-targeted mechs.

Anyone else think this would have merit?


Kurshuk

Hmm. If it included a return to preset convergence it sounds good. Like, if you set your convergence to be 600 meters or somesuch.

[Shismar]

Too much hassle and the thread smells really rotten too.

There is no reason to discuss this as long as the netcode is not in much better shape. If and when, the topic may just as well have evaporated.

[CDLord HHGD]

I'd also like them to fix that damned bug where if you peek around cover and fire, your round goes off God knows where. This happens with PPCs and Lasers too, BUT with Ballistics, I'm expending ammo and that's a finite resource.

[HC Harlequin]

cdlord, on 18 January 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

I'd also like them to fix that damned bug where if you peek around cover and fire, your round goes off God knows where. This happens with PPCs and Lasers too, BUT with Ballistics, I'm expending ammo and that's a finite resource.

I think the lazure shooters don't see it because the lazure's always come together on the reticle

[HC Harlequin]

back to page 1 for more votes

[EvilCow]

Knockdown would be nice for the AC20 but the probability should depend on the target weight and balance. For example a running mech should me more prone to knockdown than a mech standing still and facing you.

[jakucha]

As for the autocannon firing, let's leave the "chain gun" mode to the rotary autocannon variant. Regular autocannons feel like they make more sense firing around the rates they currently do.

[HC Harlequin]

jakucha, on 19 January 2013 - 03:12 AM, said:

As for the autocannon firing, let's leave the "chain gun" mode to the rotary autocannon variant. Regular autocannons feel like they make more sense firing around the rates they currently do.

The RAC's are a comparitively new option on the canon weapons list. The original AC's could be either chain gun or single shot. but the difference was meaningless in 10 second turns