18 replies to this topic

[Calamus]

Here's my suggestion:

1. Artillery and Airstrikes should be fired from the minimap, not by direct line of site.

It's kind of the point of artillery and airstrikes, so you can lay down fire in an indirect line of site. In current day modern warfare airstrikes and artillery are called in by calling coordinates, not by a spotter with direct line of site. Precision strikes are called in with line of site and laser guidance. We already have laser guidance in TAG.

[Nainko]

I totally agree...

[MaddMaxx]

How would you have them divide up a Grid square? Which 50m radius area inside of a full grid square (+/- 350m²) is but a fraction of that whole area. At least with LoS the target(s) should get hit.

[Lucky Moniker]

while i agree completely with you on this one, the problem you could run into is on the larger maps is the precision, those grids are significantly larger, so a slight mouse twitch would mean 200m difference. But yes, you should be able to call in a strike anywhere, not just where you can see

[Oppresor]

Yes, you are right, that's why we are going to get a commander role at some stage. It should be his or her role to call in Arty / Air Strikes based on Recon info from the Lights who will effectively act as the FOO or FAC parties. If we get the commander in a tandem cockpit Mech (Discussed in at least two other threads) they would probably be working from the Tac map and Radar map for the majority of the mission anyway.

[FerrolupisXIII]

add zoom to the the map. BOOM. you'd still want LoS from someone to say "yes there are mechs there!" and if your shot had any affect on the enemy formation. i think one of the reasons they dont let us is that as soon as anyone starts capping a base in any game mode, someone will just open the map and arty strike it.

as a side note to that, does anyone know if tucking say a light mech up under the Base Structure might be able to avoid some of the fire? seems sneaky to me haha. heck even my Catapults fit under it.

[Koolkevz666]

I think that you could have both. On one hand you can call arty/air strikes from the mini map however, these would be less accurate as the gunners/pilots will only be told what general area to strike whereas if you used LOS the strike would be more accurate due to better targeting info.

[Enmon]

I agree with Calamus

[Calamus]

MaddMaxx, on 03 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

How would you have them divide up a Grid square? Which 50m radius area inside of a full grid square (+/- 350m²) is but a fraction of that whole area. At least with LoS the target(s) should get hit.

A good point. The way they have arty/air strikes right now precision would be a bit difficult. After seeing how they did it, I think they dropped the ball on that as well though. I'm not saying that they should do more damage per shell, but I think that they surely should have a larger damage radius, and should cover larger areas as well, perhaps with more shells per strike if balancing called for it. If they had planned strikes that way, then your point would be moot; plus someone already mentioned that you can zoom into the map for a more precise strike.

Lucky said:

while i agree completely with you on this one, the problem you could run into is on the larger maps is the precision, those grids are significantly larger, so a slight mouse twitch would mean 200m difference. But yes, you should be able to call in a strike anywhere, not just where you can see

Zooming into the map will help this, but you're right: as they have strikes right now, with number of shells, radius, etc. it probably wouldn't work well.

Oppressor said:

Yes, you are right, that's why we are going to get a commander role at some stage. It should be his or her role to call in Arty / Air Strikes based on Recon info from the Lights who will effectively act as the FOO or FAC parties. If we get the commander in a tandem cockpit Mech (Discussed in at least two other threads) they would probably be working from the Tac map and Radar map for the majority of the mission anyway.

Tandem pilots, that's interesting. Is there support for this lore-wise? I'm afraid I never read much Battletech. I like the idea though.

FerrolupisXIII said:

i think one of the reasons they dont let us is that as soon as anyone starts capping a base in any game mode, someone will just open the map and arty strike it.

They themselves promoted doing this in the patch notes.

Everyone made interesting points, and I agree with you all, that how they did create strikes my idea probably won't work. And I certainly don't advocate them going back to square one with these considering how far behind they are on everything else (considering their "September launch" timetable).

I think it's too bad. they missed a great opportunity here to create a really cool dynamic to the game... I'm bummed now.

[Marj]

I think this should be done by clicking on the exact point on the minimap or battlegrid you want to fire at. Not much point in having it if you have to be on top of the base to launch it (e.g. Forest Colony or Frozen City).

[RedEagle86]

Calamus, on 03 April 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Here's my suggestion:

1. Artillery and Airstrikes should be fired from the minimap, not by direct line of site.

It's kind of the point of artillery and airstrikes, so you can lay down fire in an indirect line of site. In current day modern warfare airstrikes and artillery are called in by calling coordinates, not by a spotter with direct line of site. Precision strikes are called in with line of site and laser guidance. We already have laser guidance in TAG.

I totally agree, except that I think in order to call in any off-map support, you should have the command console loaded.

[Gryphorim]

RedEagle86, on 04 April 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

I totally agree, except that I think in order to call in any off-map support, you should have the command console loaded.

+1 from me.

[Klaa]

Imho it would kinda depend on just how effective the attacks are; however, despite using such twice so far, I really haven't been amazed.

Depending on the attack strength, using a map grid may be perfectly fine. Line of sight can be retained for more accurate coordinates, and perhaps even enable the usage of NARC/TAG for greater accuracy.

[Hotthedd]

Re-work Arty and Airstrikes to bombard an entire grid. Use the mini-map. Must have Command console. Voila.

[Target Rich]

This suggestion fits into the category of instant oxymoron...line of sight...means you are sniping....period..you convert the artillery/airstrike into another shell in your sniping pool.

An artillery airstrike...in fundamental concept is something you call in to a remote location based on a grid lat long/gps. It will splatter everything in that grid with damage...

You can lase the target to increase accuracy...but in concept is at its heart...INDIRECT fire...period

If you are going to play this like a direct fire...I suggest you eliminate the airstrike/artillery strike all together and just substitute the monster howie weapon was was included in MW4... You could shoot that puppy ...and it took virtually all the hardpoints on an assault to do it... It was indirect fire...but you had no clue what it would hit and you would normally have a spotter mech that would call it into you and correct fire for you...

[Kyzar Kon]

Prefer it to be a module specific for command console. Art should be a long duration call that pushes mech out of their position.

Problem is that beginning of match we know where the enemy starts, where they're going before your team even sees them. So by the time you engage them they might have been hit by 2 support fires, Same could happen to you.

Calamus, on 03 April 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Here's my suggestion:

1. Artillery and Airstrikes should be fired from the minimap, not by direct line of site.

It's kind of the point of artillery and airstrikes, so you can lay down fire in an indirect line of site. In current day modern warfare airstrikes and artillery are called in by calling coordinates, not by a spotter with direct line of site. Precision strikes are called in with line of site and laser guidance. We already have laser guidance in TAG.

[Calamus]

Kaiser R Metzger, on 07 April 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

Prefer it to be a module specific for command console. Art should be a long duration call that pushes mech out of their position.

See, that's what I would assume an airstrike should be for as well. At the moment it seems to do so little damage that everyone just stands in the middle of it syaing, 'meh'. It's equal to a single PPC shot...

[Allen Ward]

totally agree. and the cap issue...hey, capping is the least thing one needs in a giant robot combat game like MWO. it's a bad excuse for "we didn't have any better idea for a battle scenario". "conquering" a stupid wtf-object by simply standing next to it is the lamest thing I have seen in years. the ressource thing is not much better. why is a wtf-object in the water somewhere behind a hill and a ship wreck considered a valuable tactical target/position? what if one side had to defend a city (5-7 capture points in the city with different difficulty of reach/cover/ground) and the other would have to conquer. they could have done that on Alpine Peaks. But no, again it's: send yoour Lights to those wtf-objects in the middle of nowhere and the rest clash in the middle...

if CW will continue this instead of improving it drastically, I'm out.

[MasterErrant]

in TT airstrikes are a larger area but lower damage effect. (A srtip three hexes wide crossing an entire map board. and are always called in directly. Artillary is target mostly in advance and use to deny map areas. a long tom shot was 20 dam to one hex and 10 to the surounding for a 90 meter radius...that's on shell. an airstrike was the total laser damage of the fighter spread across the area hitting each targer in the area. this could range fro light damage up to devastating for some of the assault fighters. but spread in clusters/\.