Yeah... 'balance' problems -- It's not the weapons

[Syllabus]

It's the hard lock-on.

It's not the just the perceived problem in PvP, but also probably why some people find certain missions or bosses "abnormally" difficult. This is sort of a "unique" problem of the PC version in that a lot of the game population uses keyboard+mouse setting. The KBM control scheme makes things very different.

Well, OK. To be more accuracte, rather, it works the same as how a controller would react in that touching the right stick immediately breaks hard lock-on.

While this is pretty easy to manage with a controller in that a typical player would fiddle with the camera for basic maneuvering and scouting, once combat begins the lock-on is engaged and they just leave it there -- with a KBM setting (which most players are used to quick panning camera at lightning speeds) once hard lock-on is engaged the mouse needs to be floating, as in, absolutely still. So any excess movement caused by small mistakes or pressing the button may immedately break the lock-on.

Now, with the risks of KBM making targeting wonky a lot of KBM users are accommodated to just not using hard lock-on, or using it in limited bursts, and then mostly use manual panning --> not the manual aiming, but manually controlling the camera to continuously face the target for weapon aiming. I've been used to it for a long time, and so have some of my aquaintances.

So when these conditions are equal the so-called "balance problems" of the weapons are less evident, because the fights usually turn out to what many were familiar in the old AC series. As in, lighter, faster mechs zipping around constantly breaks lock, and very often makes you actually lose sight of the enemy -- in which case you actually have to attempt to egress, get your bearings back and relocated the opponent to engage again.

Naturally, in this KBM environment, I never understood what people meant that "double gatlings is broken" because with manual panning (again, not manual aiming) no matter how great it builds up stagger, clever close-range maneuvering has a fair chance to throw off the opponent's aim, or even make them totally lose sight of you.

This works largely the same way in the main game, fighting certain enemies and bosses are incredibly difficult and requires a lot of focus, because clever enemies maneuver in irregular directions at high angles, which is difficult to track manually. So not only does a lot of your shots miss, but also this naturally teaches you to learn to actually time your shots.

Like, for example, pacing out your shots until it becomes apparent the opponent is very low in EN, at which point you let 'er rip. Or, firing guided missiles to force a QB evasion from the enemy, and then shoot when the enemy comes out of QB. In other words, the things we used to learn and practice in past AC games and its matches.

So, again, under a KBM scheme using manual panning, doing things like just holding down the gatling gun button is a pretty stupid thing to do. The average rate of attack for everyone is lower, because accuracy of tracking shots while moving is very unstable due to the lock-on breaking off easily, and sudden QB evasives and maneuvering actually does work. There is hardly any 'balance problem' in this situation.

...

Now, a few days ago, I started to really try out hard-lock on to see how much difference it really makes. And well, apparently, it doesn't matter if the opponent is the fastest mech build possible and you're the slowest. No matter how many times the opponent zips around the screen there is no dead angle, like, at all. The hard lock-on stay perefctly on target, and shot accuracy is guaranteed. So, like everyone knows, you can equip double gatling and charge in close with hard lock-on, and it makes opponent movements trivial.

So since relative differences in movement speeds or other key factors in combat don't mean anything, and everyone has perfectly tracking automatic aim, then naturally the fight devolves and degenerates down into a very simple war of attrition. You bring a tougher mech, with stronger (more effective for stagger) guns, and just shoot first and hope the other guys drops faster.

...

What this means, is no matter how they "rebalance" the weapons, nothing's gonna change so long as the hard lock-on stays a relevant factor in PvP. Buff other weapons? So what? It'll just mean now every weapon will be doing same rate of staggering, but the fight will play out exactly the same -- bring a bigger, tougher mech, hard lock-on, get in range and just hold triggers down and hope the other guy staggers first.

...

A lot of you may not like to hear this, especially if you've been making good use of hard lock-on in PvP and main game. But I think the actual solution to the commonly perceived problem is simply the devs disabling hard lock-on function in PvP.

If you have friends, try out a match with participants honoring promises to only sue manual camera panning / manual aiming. No hard lock-ons. It's a totally different ball game, and feels a LOT closer to past AC versions where whole lot of skill is invovled.

Just rebalancing the weapons is not gonna fix anything.

[RX-3DR]

Originally posted by Aldain:

Not that that was exceptionally difficult in 90% of circumstances for those games, at least until around the Nexus/LR era where some enemies (mostly non-AC bosses like Pulverizers and *$&# like Zinaida) started to get...zippy.

It at least provided some level of complication to fighting in close-range where you had to consider your FCS and Turn Speed.

It would have at least made shotguns in close range slightly harder to use by making close-range fights more centered around maneuvering around their FCS. However, it slams all close-range weapons together and shotguns will likely still come out on top since it just needs an enemy to be in your FCS for a brief moment to do their damage/impact.

[Whatever100500]

Well, Zimmers/SNA and to slightly lesser degree Gatling/Songbird are objectively best weapons. Both due to excellent raw stats and how they fit into stagger-centric boss design.

But at the same time, yes, hardlock gives some objective advantages I'd prefer it didn't. Namely tracking on boost kick and ability to boost past enemy -> instantly turn and shoot (you can try to imitate with manual quick turn, but you won't get as fast or reliable).

[Blackmage]

As gatekeepy as it sounds, hard-lock is a feature for casual play, and it really does lower the skill ceiling. It's like playing Halo and you can never miss with the sniper rifle. The player's only saving grace is an AC has more hit points than Master Chief.
But I've beaten the whole game without hard-lock.

While I can agree hard-lock is a problem from a logical standpoint, it is only one component of AC6's balancing problem. I see Armored Core 6's balancing problem as an outcome of the combination of four bad ideas that seemed good on paper - assigning each weapon its own input in lieu of cycling weapons, removing turning speed, hard-lock, and stagger.

Hard-lock was meant to make the game more accessible with a controller due to the fact they assigned each weapon its own input instead of cycling between weapons. But Hard-lock and the absence of turning speed means you can go as heavy as you want and you will not be punished for it in any way. There is no reason to not go in heavy.
Turning speed stats kept heavy ACs in check.

They should have made R2 and L2 "shoot right" and "shoot left" and made R1 and L1 boost and quick boost and made the X and square face buttons "cycle right weapon" and "cycle left weapon." This would solve a lot of problems because cycling weapons kept OP weapons in check, and it lets controller players get by more easily without hard-lock or claw grips. Stagger's potency is further amplified by the fact you can fire all four weapon slots at the same time.

With stagger being over-tuned and central to the game's combat, the weapon meta is very specific. Energy weapons are meant to be high damage and low impact is a great idea, but forcing your opponent to idle is too powerful to ignore, and the bonus damage is the only way to deal meaningful damage to bosses - and they're just as, if not more, effective against everything else. No sense in bringing a trash mob rifle when a Zimmerman can do the same thing just as well, and is more effective against other ACs, heavy armored targets, and bosses.

All of these factors in conjunction have made AC6's balancing the mess that it is.

[Zengar]

The people who are arguing with this post didn't try both keyboard and joystick. I did, I started with keyboard and mouse and had an incredible time, then moved to joystick by about chapter 4 and it changed the game completely and I think it was for the worse.
It really does make a huge difference in how the game and some weapons are used.
Twin gattlings is one of the most obvious one, but zimmers as well. I didn't get what was so overpowered about them until I saw the power of hard lock on a joystick...
At the same time, boosting and going melee was actually easier with the mouse because I could actually correct movement easier.
It's a great game, but it's meaningless for PVP. Just take it as a great single player game.

[MerryMarauder]

wow, i just tried it and the hard lock on the joystick is quite something, ive been on kb and mouse this entire time and the hard lock on the joystick would make things a lot easier.

[Vazc0]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-Nl4Ymnvl4&t=2s&ab_channel=ClericArmoredCore

looks like many people still dont understand that hardlock is mostly to help new players to get into the game with a controller. yes, it helps with melee and turning in super close combat, but its a really big handicap other than that. you should avoid hardlocking when ever possible, or you'll miss a lot of your shots.

i cant imagine why you would ever use it on mouse and keyboard.

[Aarpia]

I'm not reading all that because you're wrong

[DirtyMick]

Originally posted by Codester:

Not sure what you're talking about. Literally every AC game uses the same type of hard lock on camera. If your mobility is fast enough to offset the fcs itself and the weapon speed then you won't get hit unless you slow.
It has *always* functioned this way. Hence the entire point of picking weight VS speed.
Offense VS mobility.
Health VS dodging.

This formula has been the same since Ac1.

Bro. What? What AC game automatically moved the camera for you? I think you are missing the point. Have you tried hard lock yet?

I will say, it is the weapons too. It's not just the hard lock that makes things unbalanced.

[nubi]

No, Zimmerman is just OP, not only is it way over tuned but its braindead easy to use.

[BKo]

Yeah I could do without the hard lock in this game. I don't really care if it aims "slightly worse," in a game where everything needs to be point blank to do good damage and impact, you're not juking any shots at that range.

[Nauct]

Soft lock on is better because your aim is more accurate, what you on about

[Syllabus]

Try about 10 days without hard lock-on PvP, which will probably push you past the patience ceiling if you've been using it extensively -- and then come tell me "it doesn't make a difference."

Like others who get it have aptly mentioned, turn speed was a thing. While the lock-on is automatic in any AC game, facing the opponent to get the lock-on within the screen has always been a manual task. The way AC6 sets its hard lock-on to work, is ub the method what the combat flight-sim community has traditionally been calling "padlock" since... like two decades ago, and AC games were NOT padlock .

Now with turn speed out of the factor, screen/camera panning is that much faster for everyone, but SO IS THE PACE OF THE GAME.

Again, not much to say but "if you're skeptical, try it."

There ARE no 'balance issues' -- almost none even with the weapons ppl think are weak, like AR, because the supposedly OP weapons themselves lose efficiency.

25% drop in accuracy means NOTHING when its pit against just how easy it is to get disoriented and lose target.

Getting out of FCS lock is not only possible, but VERY probable the closer the ranges become, the faster and lighter the opponent is, when you don't have hard lock. Tracking enemy movement with manual panning is easy only when its like the current where tanky, slow heavy builds have just become mandatory.

Heck, even manually tracking bosses, with their huge size, can become difficult when they cross the zenith of your pov and cause situations which feel like "reverse guard" situations in fighting games. None of these complications which become natural deterrents to the current "meta" are in effect when hard lock-on negates all of it.

[danktamale]

They need to add a sensitivity option for how much mouse movement is required to disengage hardlock.

[Call Sign: Raven]

Hard lock enhances your mobility in 1v1 combat. That's it's purpose. The accuracy debuff isn't that strong, believe it or not.

It's important to switch between hard and soft lock on, situation dependent. Each offers different advantages.

Did you know you can't strafe while in soft lock, unless you are actively firing weapons? If you aren't firing, your mech will come to a fill stop, turn around, then change directions if you go the opposite way.

But you can strafe all the time in hard lock, granting superior mobility. Knowing when to use that situation can make or break your encounters.

[qwerlancer]

KB+M with softlock is on par with controller's hardlock in most cases. If you adapt using your mouse at very high DPI you can literally become Amuro Ray in AC6 but controller players can't. Change my mind.