378 replies to this topic

[Nightcrept]

It would actually be the opposite of the ops suggestion but would involve more ecm and eccm warfare.

A bit like the players post earlier about target reticules colors.

[Waking One]

So you find running around at 80kph jumpjetting turning to the side with perfect aim realistic?

Otherwise i don't agree with OP much, except they should give proper camera shake to jumpjetting, poptarts are ridiculously accurate and easy to pull off.

[Alois Hammer]

cyberFlake, on 15 April 2013 - 02:49 AM, said:

Sounds like a moronic assumption made by a .....

Sounds like the thread's OP then.

[Nightcrept]

To elaborate.

You would have at least three targeting modes.
1. Computer controlled targeting.
This mode allows you to lock onto a target a lot like lrms do. The longer you maintain lock the better the accuracy. A red lock will hit somewhere randomly on the targeted mech, Yellow will let you target a section of the targeted mech and the comp will auto adjust to keep the lock there, Green will allow the targeting of specific parts of the target mech.
Targeted mechs can break locks via ecm modules and or getting out of los.

2. Computer stabilized manual aiming.
Think modern battle tanks and our current in game system. The computer and a gyro keep your weapons steady and adjusts for speed, terrain and shaking but the cross hair movement is a little slower.

3. Hands free aiming.
NO computer assistance. Much faster to aim but you get terrain shaking , a larger reticule etc.



You can even make options 1 and 2 be modules that can be disabled via ecm warfare and or emp weapons etc.

Waking One, on 15 April 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

So you find running around at 80kph jumpjetting turning to the side with perfect aim realistic?

Otherwise i don't agree with OP much, except they should give proper camera shake to jumpjetting, poptarts are ridiculously accurate and easy to pull off.

Considering the tech level involved and our current real world military abilities yes.
Simple gyro stabilization can achieve much of that now.

[Tice Daurus]

Here's the thing...The DEV's already know that they need to work on the targeting system in it's relation to heat that when you get a higher heat build up on your mech, the targeting recticle should at first flicker and then disappear completely once you get up to a certain threshold. It should start to flicker, say between 50 percent to 75 percent and then disappear completely around 76 to 99 percent.

The DEV's do know this, it's been submitted to them and it's in the works from what's been discussed in the past. If and when this will happen, I can't say.

[Alienfreak]

Nightcrept, on 15 April 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

The op's concept moves the game farther from realism.

I would prefer moving it closer to reality if it needs to be moved at all.

You ever shot a rifle or used an actuator?

Every rifle or gun out there has MoA and recoil. Every actuator both has an actuation speed as well as accuracy. And as your rifle gets hotter it gets less accurate.

as in: there will be a CoF (also influenced by heat). There will be a time until the weapon converged at a target at a certain distance.

[Nightcrept]

Don't get me wrong I hate poptarting and every mech being a sniper. But it is realistic.
We just need to balance it out with the other types of mech warfare.


Probably non-canon option would be.

A true stealth armor.
We can already make tanks vanish under certain situations. Make a armor or module that is weak but can allow you to be invisible at distance. The closer you get the more it starts to shimmer or something until it's within x distance and becomes visible.

[DocBach]

Nightcrept, on 15 April 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

Considering the tech level involved and our current real world military abilities yes.
Simple gyro stabilization can achieve much of that now.

The thing is, MechWarrior isn't based in reality; it's based in the Battletech universe where we have machine guns that have a 90m maximum effective range -- the universe is coming out of an era that was described as Mad Max in space with walking robots. The average planet in the Inner Sphere was closer in lifestyle to middle ages fiefdom than 21st century technology.

[Alienfreak]

Tice Daurus, on 15 April 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Here's the thing...The DEV's already know that they need to work on the targeting system in it's relation to heat that when you get a higher heat build up on your mech, the targeting recticle should at first flicker and then disappear completely once you get up to a certain threshold. It should start to flicker, say between 50 percent to 75 percent and then disappear completely around 76 to 99 percent.

The DEV's do know this, it's been submitted to them and it's in the works from what's been discussed in the past. If and when this will happen, I can't say.

This is ingame already! On random basis the HUD and/or reticule disappear. Its like in 1/10 of all cases.

/troll

[xZaOx]

Take out randomness and random crits = skill.

[Alienfreak]

Nightcrept, on 15 April 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

Considering the tech level involved and our current real world military abilities yes.
Simple gyro stabilization can achieve much of that now.

So you say that cannot produce ultra AC2s or ultra AC10s? (only UAC5)
Or maybe they cannot get a freaking guidance on anything but 2 missiles at the same time? (Streaks...)
.
.
.

Battletech is a universe of lost technology.

[Fut]

xZaOx, on 15 April 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Take out randomness and random crits = skill.

There's a lot of randomness in real world combat.
I'd say that it takes more skill to overcome a bit of randomness and still be effective in combat, than it does to be effective in a sterile environment where the conditions are always exactly the same.

Randomness isn't a bad thing, and it won't take away from any skill involved in this game.

[Elkarlo]

Tekadept, on 14 April 2013 - 11:58 PM, said:

Just for reference on calibers below

Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings.

An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "shot", while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, but causing higher damage. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.

A 120mm Rheinmetall weights 5.1 Tons without autoloader and would weight aprox 6 tons with Autoloader. And it got a Barrel 5 Meters long. Long Barrel + 6 Tons Systemweight= AC/2
A wasn't reffering to the bore size as i know that Autocannon means Multishot.

[Nightcrept]

Alienfreak, on 15 April 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

You ever shot a rifle or used an actuator?

Every rifle or gun out there has MoA and recoil. Every actuator both has an actuation speed as well as accuracy. And as your rifle gets hotter it gets less accurate.

as in: there will be a CoF (also influenced by heat). There will be a time until the weapon converged at a target at a certain distance.

lol...I worked for JSOC for years and years. Before that I was a Marine. After that I was and currently am a gov contracted intelligence asset. (I just got back from uae last week from a week long trip). I have spent more time with every valid weapon available to a operator then most special operation units operators all combined. So yes I have fired a rifle.

We use gyro stabilized weapons on some of our high tech weapons systems and transports now that can do exactly what your talking about. Combine that with a computer controlled system that can independently adjust each weapon by even small amounts over a long distance and bam. Pinpoint accuracy with a giant stompy robot.

And gyro stabilization would be necessary for a giant stompy robot to walk to begin with.

[Vassago Rain]

Fut, on 15 April 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

There's a lot of randomness in real world combat.
I'd say that it takes more skill to overcome a bit of randomness and still be effective in combat, than it does to be effective in a sterile environment where the conditions are always exactly the same.

Randomness isn't a bad thing, and it won't take away from any skill involved in this game.

Real combat is about minimizing chance and luck. It doesn't take SKILL to overcome randomness, but LUCK. That's the whole point.

You don't overcome random with SKILL. If you overcome it with skill, it's not random anymore.

Edited by Vassago Rain, 15 April 2013 - 07:31 AM.

[Fut]

Vassago Rain, on 15 April 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

Real combat is about minimizing chance and luck. It doesn't take SKILL to overcome randomness, but LUCK. That's the whole point.

You don't overcome random with SKILL. If you overcome it with skill, it's not random anymore.

Oh, so a real-world Sniper facing a sudden onset of crosswinds would overcome this situation with... luck?
They wouldn't use their skillset to identify the change of conditions and alter their sighting accordingly.... It'd be luck.

Thanks, I fully understand now.

Edit:

I had another thought on what you said.
If there's so much luck involved in real-world combat, as you claim - surely MWO could use some realism via a little bit of randomness and luck.

Edited by Fut, 15 April 2013 - 07:35 AM.

[Nightcrept]

DocBach, on 15 April 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

The thing is, MechWarrior isn't based in reality; it's based in the Battletech universe where we have machine guns that have a 90m maximum effective range -- the universe is coming out of an era that was described as Mad Max in space with walking robots. The average planet in the Inner Sphere was closer in lifestyle to middle ages fiefdom than 21st century technology.

Which makes zero sense.
Making those weapons from a technological perspective is far easier then making the comp systems for the mech.

Alienfreak, on 15 April 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

So you say that cannot produce ultra AC2s or ultra AC10s? (only UAC5)
Or maybe they cannot get a freaking guidance on anything but 2 missiles at the same time? (Streaks...)
.
.
.

Battletech is a universe of lost technology.

The things you mention need to be added to the game. They would be there and should be. They are missing chains in a logical weapons tree.

As I have said over and over it is obvious that the people who made BT were nerds with no concept of real military thinking. It's cool to use them as a guide but we need to deviate to make a the real world application of mwo better.

Even if every part of the mechs we drive are salvaged the missing things like you mentioned shouldn't be missing.

Edited by Nightcrept, 15 April 2013 - 07:40 AM.

[3rdworld]

ITT: bads that are tired of getting shot.

Or people that think realism in a game about giant robits is relevant in any way.

[DocBach]

Nightcrept, on 15 April 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

As I have said over and over it is obvious that the people who made BT were nerds with no concept of real military thinking. It's cool to use them as a guide but we need to deviate to make a the real world application of mwo better.

I think you need to understand the game you are playing better before you come in demanding that reality be injected into a game that isn't based on reality.

The game wasn't designed with realism or military thinking in mind, it was designed to be balanced and fun. When you add realism, you break the system, unless you rebuild everything from the ground up... but then, it wouldn't be Battletech anymore.

[Nightcrept]

Fut, on 15 April 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

Oh, so a real-world Sniper facing a sudden onset of crosswinds would overcome this situation with... luck?
They wouldn't use their skillset to identify the change of conditions and alter their sighting accordingly.... It'd be luck.

Thanks, I fully understand now.

Edit:

I had another thought on what you said.
If there's so much luck involved in real-world combat, as you claim - surely MWO could use some realism via a little bit of randomness and luck.

That example would be more applicable to a game using humans. All the adjustments a spotter would make for wind etc sould be done for us by the mechs comp.

But i do see your point.

DocBach, on 15 April 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I think you need to understand the game you are playing better before you come in demanding that reality be injected into a game that isn't based on reality.

The game wasn't designed with realism or military thinking in mind, it was designed to be balanced and fun. When you add realism, you break the system, unless you rebuild everything from the ground up... but then, it wouldn't be Battletech anymore.

Problem there is that it doesn't translate well from BT tt to real world gaming. You must make it a bit more realistic to make it balanced.

And mwo needs to be fun and succeed more then it needs to stick to BT lore. IMO.