131 replies to this topic

[Bguk]

Exodus 2pt0, on 30 January 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

If we can see specific information about an enemies weapon load out and real time damage, doesn't it makes sense that we could surely see our team mate's?

I'd prefer to not even see the enemies loadouts! Unless we had a module for it. Make it a part of informational warfare. The same could even be done for friendlies, although that would be a bit too much.

[Mercules]

Bguk, on 30 January 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

For instance, if you see a Cat sitting in the back lines, he's a LRM boat; if he's headed to the front lines, he's a SRMer.

You would think that would be how it would work. You would be surprised how often I see a C4 with 4 LRM15s charging into close quarters..... especially when that was one of the Trial Mechs. Then there are the times I've charged at the C1 hanging out in the far back only to find out it only had an LRM10 and the rest was SRM6s. Okay... that was a smart trap.

[Broceratops]

Bguk, on 30 January 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

I'd prefer to not even see the enemies loadouts! Unless we had a module for it. Make it a part of informational warfare. The same could even be done for friendlies, although that would be a bit too much.

this would be kind of cool.

[Bguk]

Mercules, on 30 January 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

You would think that would be how it would work. You would be surprised how often I see a C4 with 4 LRM15s charging into close quarters..... especially when that was one of the Trial Mechs. Then there are the times I've charged at the C1 hanging out in the far back only to find out it only had an LRM10 and the rest was SRM6s. Okay... that was a smart trap.

Oh yeah, seen that as well. There are always exceptions to the rule. As a standard though, that's how I see Cats. A dead Cat is better than a living in either case.

[Mercules]

It is a bit silly, though, that the enemy has a better idea what the load out and health of our team is than we do.

[Fyrerock]

Last week I was in my sniper cataph and I ended up following another cataph into the ice tunnel and started to snipe from behind. An atlas started to head our way, and instead of run I decided to duke it out because 2 cataph should be able to take on a atlas, but my team mate decided to run and the reason he ran was because all he had was flamers and machine guns as weapons.

Most of the bad players quit the game when they die so they have no clue just how little damage they do, so having a running damage screen would help people where they are going wrong.

[Divine Madcat]

Mercules, on 30 January 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

It is a bit silly, though, that the enemy has a better idea what the load out and health of our team is than we do.

Better put than the way I said it.

At my heart, I feel this will make playing for pugs better, and that should never be a bad thing...

[Xenon Codex]

Exodus 2pt0, on 30 January 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

I'm just going to take a logical stand point here.

If we can see specific information about an enemies weapon load out and real time damage, doesn't it makes sense that we could surely see our team mate's?

THIS. It is completely silly and illogical not be able to know this info for friendlies when we can get it on the enemy. I don't necessary need paper-doll detail, but at least their weapon status.

I asked this question in the last Ask the Devs, and Bryan actually made a comment on it in his last uber-answer post. Hope they take it seriously.

Bryan Ekman, on 22 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

7. The ability to target friendly 'mechs? Maybe

[Zeh]

I don't understand why there's a single post arguing against this. It's not a divisive feature some people want, it's basic functionality that is RIDICULOUS for this game to be missing. It's also insane to imagine a world in which you can target and get more information regarding your enemies than your lance-mates.

RI-DIC-U-LOUS.

Plz include this in the next patch, I think it should be embarrassing to them that they haven't put this in-game. MWLL had this from probably their first build. New key to cycle through friendly targets. Do it.

[Bguk]

Zeh, on 30 January 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

I don't understand why there's a single post arguing against this. It's not a divisive feature some people want, it's basic functionality that is RIDICULOUS for this game to be missing. It's also insane to imagine a world in which you can target and get more information regarding your enemies than your lance-mates.

RI-DIC-U-LOUS.

I'd prefer to not see friends or enemies loadouts. Enemies with a module.

[Mercules]

Bguk, on 30 January 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

I'd prefer to not see friends or enemies loadouts. Enemies with a module.

I would simply revise that to say....

I would prefer not to see friendly loadouts without a Command Console or Enemy Loadouts without a Module or maybe Beagle Active Probe.

[Divine Madcat]

A module isn't a horrible idea for targeting friendlies, but still seems like something over the top for something that has always been part of MW

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Just to be clear, would ECM block friendly targeting?

[Khobai]

Quote

It is a bit silly, though, that the enemy has a better idea what the load out and health of our team is than we do.

Yep! You should be able to target friendly mechs and see their damage/loadouts.

Quote

Just to be clear, would ECM block friendly targeting?

Yes. ECM should cut off your link to your teammates if youre inside the ECM bubble. The only thing ECM shouldnt do is grant 75% stealth.

[StalaggtIKE]

I would like to see this added. As a frequent pugger I use 'Q' regularly to check on my teammates health. This allows me to determine who needs help without the need for TS. On a side note, It would be nice if we still had this ability versus enemies: view load out and damage. However ECM has pretty much killed that.

[Dragonslayer Ornstein]

Knowing each others loadouts before the battle starts is one of the advantages of premades over PUGs. It's vital information for effective teamplay. If I'm a brawler, I want to find other brawlers and work with them, instead of following an Atlas that is armed completely with Gauss and ER PPCs. In a premade, I could ask teammates what they were using, and we could figure out how to work together. In a PUG, that information is completely missing for no good reason. It may not seem like much, but it is definitely one of the factors that contributes to PUG disorganization.

[Divine Madcat]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 30 January 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Just to be clear, would ECM block friendly targeting?

Ignoring that ECM is completely broken.. as it stand now, yes, it should block friendly targeting..

[Tehtos]

Since we are dreaming... I'd like a vision mode that shows damage. Remember the old image enhancement mode from MechWarrior2? Any damaged parts would show in the appropriate color.

I'd even grind for it if they made it a module, or built it into the level 2 upgrade to the advanced zoom module.

[Kurshuk]

What if instead of targeting a friendly holding down Q displays health as a % like it does now, which I think is ok. But also lists loadout next to it. I would like to know who's packing close vs long range equipment so I can hang out and be buddies with people my own range.

Kurshuk
Alexi.Kurshuk@gmail.com

[Taizan]

Divine Madcat, on 30 January 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

The percent is meaningless - i have seen mechs with no arms, and red/missing torsos with over 60% before; sorry, but a mech in that condition is not 60% effective..

So you saw the mech is misisng arms and partially missing torso and knew it's status, you basically don't even need the % number to recognize that. That is the beauty that mechs loose their specific limbs and parts when they are being shredded apart.

For viewing the loadout, I'm not sure about that and do not see many benefits. Maybe differentiating a PPC/AC/Gauss cat, but then some nice day we will hopefully have mechs reflecting their loadout visually. The next thing would be to find out if that missile mech is stocked with LRMs or SRMs, well just looking at how they move will usually answer that question.

Personally I've voted no on both poll questions, because it would just add another layer of information noise to what is essentially already available.