38 replies to this topic

[Creepy]

Quote

IF it were a sensor, and IF water droplets could get on the sensor, would it not stand to reason that the computer would simply edit the input and correct for errors from the water droplets?

Correcting those errors are going to be tricky since the sensor would need to know if anything is obscuring the image, what's populating the field of vision, what the nature of the obscuring is (if anything), and how to make those corrections. A water droplet isn't going to be an even lens, coming in different shapes and sizes, and won't always just warp but also blur or otherwise diffuse the light. It might be able to calculate subsurface scattering but when will it know to do this? An easier approach would be to subject an area to a wide range of radiation and then form a picture from that -which might be doable considering the powerplant mechs run off of but the image built would arguably not be in color as we see with the naked eye. At that point I imagine it's probably going to build a picture more akin to "nightvision" -likely a lot of work for something like rain, and may not even work all that well. Radiation will still have to pass through matter and the reflections are still prone to distortion/diffusion. Whatever is encasing the sensor, be it glass, metal, wood, or unobtainium, may also effect it to some degree. Sometimes you'll see a mark on the nose of a jet plane that says "Do Not Paint."

I'm not going to say it's impossible but it would likely be pretty difficult.

Hell. The easier way for rain is to simply have it coated with a temporary substance. When you shave (IF you shave,) and you're having trouble dealing with fog on the mirror, take a small bit of shaving cream and wipe it on the glass. It should help keep it clear. I hear chewing tobacco on windshields do pretty well for rainy days as well. Low tech, and it solves the problem. Of course, you can also buy this stuff that keeps water from beading on windshields too

Quote

Also, would it not stand to reason that there would be MANY sensors, and that the image would be compiled from all those inputs, removing any imperfections that would be on one sensor and not an other?

Maybe. I'm not sure how far tech has gotten with stereoscopic/composite imagery but it would certainly be something interesting to combine with a 3D monitor. There's this mech I've been tinkering around with redesigning called the Cyclops I was thinking about adding a stereoscopic rangefinder on in addition to a few other tank related elements to the head (I was trying to keep the spirit of the original mech intact but adding some stuff that seemed to make sense.)

Quote

I imagine MANY kinds of sensors are used to provide your display data, not just visual cameras, but I could be asking for too much.

Naa. More the question is what kind of radiation would be used to flood the area in order to get a return image and what kind of passive sensors would there be? Some radiation would be terribly unhealthy to stand in front of, and with ECM at work the output could potentially get unhealthy when you have the backing of a mech generator if no one cares about infantry, civilians, or any unshielded life forms... Anyway, there's probably at least IR -mechs would light up real good with that.

Quote

I still say that if mechs really DID have windows for real, at some point the pilot would go blind from all the lasers and PPC shots out there without some kind of optical buffer...

They likely do.

---

Quote

http://en.wikipedia....nium_oxynitride

That seemed to fit here, and may have some relevance. Transparent aluminum. Just heard about it, not an engineering-savvy person.

It sure does. I used "glass" in quotes for that very reason. It could be nanotubes, even. Remarkable technology, that. Some folks are currently researching something similar to the myomers used in mechs.

[Aegis Kleais]

Wow, this was taken pretty far off topic.

[Judochop]

Orion Pirate, on 02 June 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

IF it were a sensor, and IF water droplets could get on the sensor, would it not stand to reason that the computer would simply edit the input and correct for errors from the water droplets? After all water on a glass surface creates a lens, so simply correct for the distortion of the image through that water droplet. Also, would it not stand to reason that there would be MANY sensors, and that the image would be compiled from all those inputs, removing any imperfections that would be on one sensor and not an other? I imagine MANY kinds of sensors are used to provide your display data, not just visual cameras, but I could be asking for too much.

And not all mechs have windows that I can see, not usable windows anyway.

I still say that if mechs really DID have windows for real, at some point the pilot would go blind from all the lasers and PPC shots out there without some kind of optical buffer...
I can't argue about wear and tear, eventually everything gets worn from use, but that is what maintenance is for...

Show me one mech in the current lineup that doesn't have a transparent viewing area in the cockpit. Hell, show me an example from anywhere in Battletech. Your argument is happily sliding along Occam's Razor. In other words, your justifications are needlessly complex considering this is a video game. Good game design logic follows two overarching principles: Gameplay trumps excessive realism, and "rule of cool"- if it looks cool, does something cool, or feels cool to use, then it's probably a worthwhile addition. Piranha's idea of Mech combat is not realistic, but it is very, very cool. If they want to add some visual flair to enhance coolness further, then they should do it.

Overall I get what you're saying. It doesn't make sense in a realm of combat so dangerous, for mechwarriors to sit in a vulnerable location behind little more than a transparent barrier and a couple thin layers of armor. But that's what they do, because it's the Space 80's. If Battletech was invented today, mechs would probably be drones. It's a sign of the times, and it enhances the setting because it adds danger and makes the title of "Mechwarrior" more glamorous.

[Aegis Kleais]

Well put Judochop.

All this "Realism ad absurdum" has no place in any game, but you'll see tons of people who want to introduce crushing levels of realism into a game. There is a bell curve where as realism is added to a sim, entertainment value increases. But at a certain point, adding more realism starts reducing the level of entertainment, and in the end, people will not play a game that does not entertain them.

[Judochop]

Aegis Kleais, on 03 June 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

Well put Judochop.

All this "Realism ad absurdum" has no place in any game, but you'll see tons of people who want to introduce crushing levels of realism into a game. There is a bell curve where as realism is added to a sim, entertainment value increases. But at a certain point, adding more realism starts reducing the level of entertainment, and in the end, people will not play a game that does not entertain them.

Agreed. I personally enjoy games that toe the line between realistic and unrealistic. A setting which is believable is usually, objectively better than one which isn't. If your setting shouldn't be realistic, then it can still at least be immersive. Battlemechs by principle are unrealistic, but I absolutely believe in making them believable and real in the context they're presented in.

[Orion Pirate]

Aegis Kleais, on 03 June 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

Well put Judochop.

All this "Realism ad absurdum" has no place in any game, but you'll see tons of people who want to introduce crushing levels of realism into a game. There is a bell curve where as realism is added to a sim, entertainment value increases. But at a certain point, adding more realism starts reducing the level of entertainment, and in the end, people will not play a game that does not entertain them.

I am not asking for crushing levels of realism here...

I will make it simple. I don't believe in windows in a mech. You do. I am not asking for crushing levels of realism in the game. I was justifying why and how I don't believe in windows, and I could continue with more reasons that just makes windows NOT make sense.

Here is what is Ironic. YOU were asking for added realism to the game, not I. I was giving realistic reasons why windows were unrealistic. I never asked for any game changes at all. You did.

Edited by Orion Pirate, 03 June 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Wait a minute. We got into the material composite of a cockpit and whether such technology would be available in a fictional timeframe.

If THAT is not "excessive realism", then I'm speechless.

[Orion Pirate]

Aegis Kleais, on 03 June 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

Wait a minute. We got into the material composite of a cockpit and whether such technology would be available in a fictional timeframe.

If THAT is not "excessive realism", then I'm speechless.

I am sorry that I have brought up reasons why windows don't work. This has nothing to do with the game. Why are you being so negative with me?

[Aegis Kleais]

Orion Pirate, on 03 June 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

I am sorry that I have brought up reasons why windows don't work. This has nothing to do with the game. Why are you being so negative with me?

Orion, if your opinion is that you don't think glass-looking cockpits on Mechs, then I can respect that and be fine with it. I'm just saying that to take the discussion any further into realistic and logical reasons why it's not warranted seems like a step too far, IMO.

Edited by Aegis Kleais, 03 June 2012 - 12:34 PM.

[Orion Pirate]

Aegis Kleais, on 03 June 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

Orion, if your opinion is that you don't think glass-looking cockpits on Mechs, then I can respect that and be fine with it. I'm just saying that to take the discussion any further into realistic and logical reasons why it's not warranted seems like a step too far, IMO.

Cool. I was only giving reasons for how I view these things called "windows". You wanted to add something to the game that would add to your immersion in the game, but it would take away from my immersion in the game. I am certain that if I had simply said this without giving any reasons as to WHY I did not believe in windows, then I would not have been taken seriously.

You: I want weather effects.
Me: I don't.
You: Why not? Mechs have windows.
Me. I don't think mechs have windows and these are the reasons why...

That is all this conversation ever was. It is no different then you using your imagination to want windows then for me to use my imagination in a different way to NOT want windows. For you to tell me that my use of realism it is not warranted is limiting my ability to discuss this with you.

P.S. I do agree with everyone that some mechs have windows, and I have to deal with that.

Edited by Orion Pirate, 03 June 2012 - 12:55 PM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Orion Pirate, on 03 June 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

You: I want weather effects.
Me: I don't.
You: Why not? Mechs have windows.
Me. I don't think mechs have windows and these are the reasons why...

I think this is our problem. I never made the correlation that I wanted weather effects because Mechs have windows. This might be a miscommunication between us. I merely wanted weather effects because they add (to me) to the immersion. As for the cockpits, I was just wanting scratches and imperfections on them (for immersion sake) since a pure-clean see-through cockpit felt less immersive.

[Creepy]

Beats me. I just largely discuss things as it comes.

[Judochop]

I don't see how you can possibly argue that mechs don't have windows. I feel like at this point you must be trolling. You're ignoring plain-as-day design choices that the dev team has made, in favor of your own totally arbitrary set of standards.

Here's a quote from an article on Battlemech cockpits:

"4. Primary Viewing Screen
This is the main weapons/movement screen in the cockpit of the BattleMech. All systems enhancements. such as a heads-up target and tracking display, are projected on this screen. Screen control is maintained via several different switches In the cockpit. When nothing is activated, this screen resembles a polarized armored cockpit window. Some BattleMechs have a shield roll-away shutter. much like a blind that can be lowered and locked Into place over the cockpit window If necessary."

http://battletech.rp...pit-html&uid=68

In other words, the primary viewing screen is an armored window on which tactical data is projected.

Edited by Judochop, 03 June 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[Orion Pirate]

Judochop, on 03 June 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

I don't see how you can possibly argue that mechs don't have windows. I feel like at this point you must be trolling. You're ignoring plain-as-day design choices that the dev team has made, in favor of your own totally arbitrary set of standards.

Here's a quote from an article on Battlemech cockpits:

"4. Primary Viewing Screen
This is the main weapons/movement screen in the cockpit of the BattleMech. All systems enhancements. such as a heads-up target and tracking display, are projected on this screen. Screen control is maintained via several different switches In the cockpit. When nothing is activated, this screen resembles a polarized armored cockpit window. Some BattleMechs have a shield roll-away shutter. much like a blind that can be lowered and locked Into place over the cockpit window If necessary."

http://battletech.rp...pit-html&uid=68

In other words, the primary viewing screen is an armored window on which tactical data is projected.

Not all mechs have windows. That is all I am going to say anymore about this. Even if it is only one mech, there is a mech that does not use a window. If it is in the lore, then I am not trolling.

I am not a bad guy here because I don't agree, and provide logical reasons for why I don't agree.

What are you going to do when infantry are at your feet? Look down and shoot them? No you would use a camera to see them. If you can use a camera to view an enemy, you don't specifically need a window to see them, and not all mechs have windows, but I am repeating myself.

I am not trolling, I am not in agreement with you, and I don't necessary care about windows at this point. Your immersion and my immersion experience will be different. I use my imagination to see this differently then you.

I assume you are using imagination too right?

[Judochop]

Dude I'm not saying they can't have cameras or any of that other stuff. I just want to know why you're convinced that they don't use those big see-through bits all around their cockpit as a primary means of, you know, looking outside.

[Orion Pirate]

Judochop, on 03 June 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Dude I'm not saying they can't have cameras or any of that other stuff. I just want to know why you're convinced that they don't use those big see-through bits all around their cockpit as a primary means of, you know, looking outside.

I am sorry, but I don't like all the negativity because I have a different view. If I explain myself, I am simply repeating what I have already written earlier, which I don't think anyone wants.

You have your view, I have mine, we all imagine things differently.

[Rodney28021]

Orion Pirate, on 01 June 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

Pass...

Cockpits would not normally be glass. You would be looking at monitor displays in your cockpit. The sensors would use many different methods to give you what you see. Optics would have a coating where water would hardly have any effect, because it would not stick and instantly run off, heck maybe some kind of electro-static method of making sure particle matter never touched the sensors etc...

If mechs really had glass cockpits, then light mechs would all be equipped with paint sprayers to blind the enemy. Heck everyone would...

All Mechs in Battletech universe have transparent armored cockpits, that is why you only have 9 point of armor protecting the head. The experimental center torso VR cockpit is a totally enclosed and protected with all the center torso armor, using sensors only to provide sight of outside. Actually, it would be cool if the glass would crack and obstruct vision after head damage. You would maybe still have your sensor view of the world while your glass is damaged. The cockpit glass is always the big target for the anti-mech infantry and battle armor to take a mech down.

Edited by Rodney28021, 04 June 2012 - 08:40 AM.

[Havyek]

If cockpits are glass, can we hire squeegee kids to follow us around and keep them clean?

[MuffinTop]

I like realisim and wear and tear appearance on models. I also like your idea about weathering on a cockpit, as well as the rest of the mech.
I'm sure the coding for each blemish, and for each and every mech in game, would be a tiresome and perhaps fruitless for the game staff. I'm more worried about game physics, and the destructible environment than this. Good idea but again too much for something thats not even eyecandy.