147 replies to this topic

[FrontGuard]

Wolfways, on 09 September 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

LRM's are practically obsolete now and you want to nerf them even more?

If you want to shoot missiles with lasers wait for the clan AMS.

Your comment is so wrong... omg... You must be Trolling

Anyway, Has anyone ever tryed to shoot down missiles with your lasers?
given everything in the game is an object you may be able to Now, As Is.

[kosmos1214]

oh twilight the reason you use shot for shooting birds is that if you used a slug it would be very dangeres shooting in to the air is a no no for that reason shot does not travel as far so its safer and it wont tear up the meat on a bird as much as a slug would the eas of hitting with shot is more of an added benefit

[Professor_Akimbox]

Im just answering to the post writer. LRM do not win 90% of times, charge them BOOM you won.
BUT YES to shooting down missiles because it would be more realistic, and awesome.

[Twilight Fenrir]

kosmos1214, on 11 December 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

oh twilight the reason you use shot for shooting birds is that if you used a slug it would be very dangeres shooting in to the air is a no no for that reason shot does not travel as far so its safer and it wont tear up the meat on a bird as much as a slug would the eas of hitting with shot is more of an added benefit

Aside from wearing blaze orange... when has safety ever trumped anything in hunting? XD Shotguns are used because it would require a great deal of skill to hit a fast moving target with a .22. A shotgun allows for a snap-shot to be more likely to hit. I live in Minnesota Hunting, Fishing, and drinking are all people do around here XD

Akimbox, on 11 December 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

Im just answering to the post writer. LRM do not win 90% of times, charge them BOOM you won.
BUT YES to shooting down missiles because it would be more realistic, and awesome.

That sure used to be my strategy... but it's much less effective with Clan LRMs on the field now. I'd agree, though, it's not 90% by a long shot. It just feels like it on what matches you DO go into, and LRM's blot out the sky...

[kosmos1214]

when has safty ever tumped any thing in hunting most of the time if you are smart other wise it way to easy to get hurt being dumb and yes i do hunt

and yah shooting down lrms would be cool

[gl0w]

Missiles too! I'd love to toss up a swarm of SRMs and catch most of those incoming missiles at times when I would rather trade the ammo for the damage.

Probably some relatively complex collision detection involved though, so I have my doubts about its feasibility.

[kosmos1214]

bump

[Robomomo2000]

LOL, this topic is still up on the first wall and there is a tie with yes and no.

Personally laser's should take out a few, but ballistics would be hard to hit with. Flamers shouldn't do a thing and I don't think MG would either. Now, SRMs would be funny to shoot into LRMs for minimized damage... but their might be some hit reg issues.

[Quaamik]

MnDragon, on 09 September 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

The AMS system is loosely based on the Phalanx CIWS (Close-in Weapon System) ............... This system fires 20mm rounds at about 4,500 rounds per minute using a 5 barrel, pneumatic driven delivery system. It uses Radar and FLIR (Forward Looking Infra-Red) to detect missiles at 9,000m and will prioritize the first 6 targets to engage at about 3,600m. TL;DR: can you fire any weapon at 4,500 rounds per minute?? .............

All true, but has nothing to do with whether a weapons system can shoot down a missile.

Theoreticaly, the main guns of a WWII battleship can shoot down a missile ....IF it can hit it. The fire control of the Phalanx and its rate of fire are not what determines if it can destroy a missile, they are what allow it to hit one. A single round of the 20 mm APDS ammo it fires that actually scores a direct hit on a missile will destroy it. All of that RoF and fire control is to get 1 round to squarely hit the missile.

Should energy and ballistic (and even other missile) weapons be able to shoot down missiles? Of course, provided they score a direct hit on a single missile. Can it be done within the program? Maybe. But it should be limited to when you score a direct hit on a missile in flight.

I see it more as a "nothing to lose" proposition that might reduce an incoming flight by 1 missile per weapon fired at best. More likely would be a 1 in 100 chance of hitting even a single missile.

Might give the top end players something to brag about though. Provided there was code to keep aimbots from being used.

[VinJade]

LRMs already have a balance, two in fact. AMS & ECMs

if a group of mechs have 1 - 2 AMS each and they are close to each other the more LRMs are destroyed. and then ther e is the op ECM that prevents lock ons and hides other mechs within the bubble more or less eliminating LRM threat all together.

so just because people refuse to mount AMS or know how to use their surroundings doesn't mean that you need more ways to try and hamper LRMs than they already are.

I say if you make it easier to shoot down missiles then they should do more damage to make up for it along with more ammo.

after all got to have balance and the OP wants to tip the balance to everyone not using LRMs.

[Astarot]

Akimbox, on 11 December 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

BUT YES to shooting down missiles because it would be more realistic, and awesome.

Have you ever heard of anyone shooting down a missile with a rifle outside of pure dumb luck(And even then I can't find anything about that.) Have you ever seen the speed which a missile flies in real life? Have you ever stopped and thought to yourself. "Well Gee, I wonder why just about all Anti-missile systems in the modern world are automated by computers?"

It not realistic at all, a human does not have the reflex to shoot down a missile by hand/joystick, and a battlemech does not have the response time to attempt such a feat. I mean it big heavy arms and all. This is why the AMS and the later Laser AMS is done purely by computer and is not directed by the pilot.

Edited by Astarot, 19 February 2016 - 05:23 PM.

[SockSlayer]

Would be cool if you could manually control AMS and aim it your self, and even be able to fire at other mechs, such thing would be helpful only at short range though, and ams would be more limited in aimability, but you likely wouldn't waste AMS ammo as you would control when it fires... Just a really crazy cool idea that probably would break lore.

Although the manual option would allow you to fire at mechs at close range, it might force you to take missle damage, you'd have to make the choice...

Edited by Independence MK2, 19 February 2016 - 07:43 PM.

[CBT Enthusiast]

RandomLurker, on 10 September 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

As to being military grade lasers, the reason laser AM systems hav etaken so long to develop in real life is because of the requirement to hold the beam on target long enough to heat up the missile. Missiles are surprisingly resilient. The beam has to rest on a single point long enough to burn through the skin and then damage the internal components. Sweeping a beam accross it is pretty much useless due the tiny expsoure time. Go look up the test videos on youtube.

Also, canon laser physics are pretty mind boggling when you start applying real physics to them. Given a 10 second exposure time (assuming the laser duration is the entire length of the game turn), 8 armor points per .5 tons, and assuming the armor is pure steel (which it should, in fact, be much stronger then), the energy input from a medium laser is enough to cause explosive vaporization of the target mass. Go look up the old posts on classic battletech forums for the guys who did the calculations on this stuff. MWO lasers clearly melt the armor, so there's no way they are powerful enough to destroy missiles with a glancing hit, and there's no way you can hold them on target manually, so it just isn't going to work.

As for laser AMS, the system automatically holds the beam on target with computer precision. That's why it -and regular ams for that matter- works.

In the end though, the gameplay balance thing makes it all irrelevent. Apply realism to btech weapons is just going to get you all sorts of headaches

ps. Fun fact: the CBT forum guys also did water displacement measurements on the mech models, calculated the mass/volume ratio, and figured out that most mechs would float in water. Apparently there's a LOT of empty space inside those things

remember this is a fantasy universe where lasers are a lot more powerful then they are in real life, if they can damage a mech then I bet they can cut a missile in two.

[CBT Enthusiast]

Khobai, on 09 September 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

Have you ever tried to shoot down a missile with a handgun?

im more then certain a laser capable of cutting through a mech could easily slice through a missile.

[CBT Enthusiast]

it would add realism and an extra feature to the game if the ability to manually shoot down missiles was added.

[Lily from animove]

who would waste his firepower on missiles? thats nonsense. you would mostlikely not even hit much except 3 or 4. A waste fo time doing so, a waste of heat, and when you are the one being targetted a waste of damage you get by not better trying to dodge them.

The downside for this marginally pointless feature would be having every missile its own hitbox, good luck trying to make this a working thing by performance and hitreg in an online game.

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 February 2016 - 07:57 AM.

[m]

I would like to nominate that Machine Guns should be included in the vote to being the deterrent to shoot down any missiles as well.

They were the weapon of choice years ago on the previous Mechwarrior game. Didn't matter the missile, machine guns took care of the problem. Not many people knew of this element in the games back then. Since AMS and Machine Guns used similar ammo, the Machine Gun could affect missiles the same as a last resort. Not sure if this is because of a hidden bug in the game or not back then but it sure worked well.


EDIT: Just realized this is a thread resurrected from 1 year ago which started 3 years ago, so I don't expect the changing in voting options. Regardless, Machine Guns are the traditional method to solve this issue based on the previous games.

Edited by m, 23 February 2016 - 03:17 PM.

[Mole]

Or you could just use cover and not have to try and shoot down the missiles.

[Doctor Dinosaur]

Mole, on 23 February 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

Or you could just use cover and not have to try and shoot down the missiles.

That's crazytalk.

Edited by Doctor Dinosaur, 24 February 2016 - 12:09 AM.

[Daemon04]

As in posts on pages 3 and around there somwhere mentioned earlier MW games have LAMS. Laser Anti Missile System. Way more comfortable than AMS and its ammo occupying tons and slots for more pew pew lasers or more ammo for missiles or ballistic weapons.

And since we mentioned weapons Ive got an idea:
Clan mechs have a bigger variety of weaponry but IS mechs are way too limited imo. Since Ive been playing older MW games for old times sake it hit me that there really is a considerable variety of weapons in those games for both IS and Clan mechs.