Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
It's a handicap more than it is a tool.
https://www.gamesradar.com/armored-core-6s-target-lock-makes-you-miss-more-shots-than-it-helps-you-hit/
It doesn't. That's just a game journalist article they pumped out because game was popular and they didn't bother to figure out the mechanics. What hardlock *actually* does is increase the time it takes to lock on, up to 300% compared to someone softlocking with the enemy perfectly centered on their screen. So you end up missing more only if you're firing before you see the crosshair has finalized its lock on the opponent.
Unless it was a mistranslation, softlock does subject your shots to RNG in addition to the slower lock-on time. This was explicitly stated in an interview with key members from the dev team, during the weeks leading up to the release of AC6. I can't remember if it was vaati or someone else.
They explained this was necessary because the hard-lock feature + 4 guns enables players to essentially power-load. It was straight up because of this design choice that balancing the weapons was the hardest thing the dev team had to do for AC6. If the shots were not subject to some amount of miss-chance with hard-lock (ignoring projectile travel time), it would be incredibly bad for gameplay - something they wished to avoid.
There is an additional caveat where using weapons that work well with your FCS and staying within your optimal range will diminish the RNG to a point where the penalty is hardly noticeable.
Nobody's seen any RNG in the projectiles outside of that caused by recoil so far even with people researching it, datamining, and playing competitively. Perhaps the RNG they speak of is the accuracy *before* it's locked on being inaccurate and that having a longer period of time than what softlock would have?
It's just one article/post as an example, there are dozens on the same subject, you miss more during Hard Lock; specifics of why aside.
This guy does testing @4:30-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IMWQTryQLQ&t=271s
That video was linked on the article, and I've seen this before. His testing is extremely bad and he isn't even really properly testing anything, he's just firing at a target jumping infront of him, but without considerations as to how it's affecting any of the lock times or what's actually causing the inaccuracy he finds, so then he just says hardlock causes the inaccuracy but that's not really specific and you can avoid inaccuracy on hardlock by understanding how it actually works.
Here's an *actual* research video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJODVgnOsbM Check the "FCS - tracking assist and arm target tracking" timestamp for the information on it.
Here's a spreadsheet I've created showing the lockon times.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1191954155053527040/1211749696796627016/FCS.png?ex=66143ed8&is=6601c9d8&hm=a5a93d1ea4e3075b670d22da8000a46c2221218f37113cc947e0fffcba0d0859&
but you don't *actually* end up missing more under hardlock generally assuming you just use it right. Like ocellus is the strongest FCS in the meta at the moment because it has a hardlock time that's shorter than abbot softlocking at close range for example.
melee's unaffected by FCS, though hardlock is best for kicks.
basically, softlock only helps you in ranges your fcs isnt specialized in.