Jump to content

Need For Analog Missiles


39 replies to this topic

#21 Lykaon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,815 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 02:52 AM

View PostRadbane, on 03 July 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

With your system 4xLRM5 > 1xLRM20. I could charge up 4 missiels 5 steps faster than 1 missile 20 steps. Everyone would do LRM5's and fire more ofthen instead of the big launchers which would take ages to lock on. Didn't think this one through?

Also, I cringe everytime I hear that skill is all about being able to put the cursor on the target. That would make a digital version of Whack-A-Mole the ultimate E-sport game.



Also let's not forget how entertaining it would be to watch 60-80 little dots fill in and block off your entire screen.

#22 Aim64C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 03:48 AM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 02 July 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Then watch the video to find out.


Text is, generally speaking, a much more effective system of communicating ideas. Videos with narration are good for showing literal examples and reinforcing the idea, not presenting it.

Quote

Talks about upping LRM speed, increasing damage, doing away with splash, giving LRM's a 1500m maximum range, ect ect.

This is only the first step.


That's fine and all - but you should really put that all together under one single proposition rather than proposing everything individually and apart from the main idea.

Honestly - I think the biggest thing with LRMs is to put them into a staggered volley fire (despite launcher) with increased velocity and a realistic thrust and guidance behavior. LRMs would have a potential range above 1000 meters based on elevation difference (assume that they are roughly 1000-1200 meters effective range on a level playing field). Time to impact would be quite small (though 'gravity' and other factors might have to be tweaked to deal with this).

Terminal guidance would be decided in a number of ways. They could do it the same as the 'new' streak homing that homes on bones with a hit probability factored in. Or, they could give each missile a separate vector once it reaches terminal range, which would cause the missiles to distribute across a cone of trajectories after realistically homing to intercept the target.

http://youtu.be/meFosnZzD0s

The current "bang-bang" guidance missiles seem to use during their descent seems to imply PGI is trying to implement something similar. ... Or ... maybe it's some kind of bug. Kind of hard to tell if that is intended behavior or not (but it does remind me of the 'wiggling' of missiles within the FLINT system used by WiC).

There would be advantages and disadvantages to using bone homing with probability factors over a simple 'scatter-shot' over the last twenty meters, or so. Using bone guidance would allow the inclusion of environmental factors, presence of ECM (assuming a rework), the chassis targeted (so lights don't get totally ****** by a 40-round volley that uses sensible guidance), etc. However,it would possibly lead to an environment where missile accuracy is arbitrarily restricted to an average maximum (assuming lock is held).

Not that either system is designed to give 100% accuracy - but it is nice to feel like your decisions and individual performance influence the performance of your weapon (though perhaps they could roll some of that type of stuff into a weapon skill-tree once the redo all of the skill tree stuff).

Quote

The video introduces you to an entire new vison mode that you can switch to for the purpose of indirect firing LRM's and "other" mech mounted artillery.


Part of the problem with using LRMs in this type of indirect fire role is that we're not dealing with hexes. You could indirect fire into a hex and still deal acceptable damage to a mech you couldn't see in table-top. Using completely unguided indirect fire into a position is just ... not really all that practical.

Unless it shows you specifically where enemy mechs are so that you can drop it right on the 10 meter diameter their mech takes up, there's almost no way in the real-time environment of this game to effectively use LRMs in that type of role - unless LRMs make some insanely radical changes. And that's going to pretty much remove scouting.

About the closest I can see coming to that would be the deployment of systems like Thunder LRMs that scatter mines cross a section of terrain. Even then - I think that would be something you use the battle map for (though that thing needs to be given some developmental love).

#23 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 03:54 AM

View PostThe Cheese, on 03 July 2013 - 01:39 AM, said:

I think you're underestimating how hard it is to be consistently effective in an LRM boat at anything but the newbie levels, especially in a team environment.

I definitely agree that the core-homing thing that they do now is a problem that should be addressed, but I'd rather see that done in such a way that makes the weapon more controllable by the dev team. I'm convinced now that most of the problems they have had in balancing them has been a direct result of using a tracking system and damage delivery mechanic that together yeilds inconsistent results.


I play in the Marik Civil War

8v8 with both teams running the same tonnage? 425, 475 or 600?


It doesn't get much more competitive than that.

and LRM's play a huge role, and LRMs will play even a bigger role with the map movement changes.

Lots of people toss out LRM's, and if my suggestions are taking into account LRM's will almost be like lasers, great if you can keep it on target doing full damage but obviously susceptible to the rigors of combat. As it should be.

LRM's can be exceptionally effective but really to reach their maximum potential it is always used in conjunction with another type of equipment. Now Tag is good, but the changes I had stated for NARC was to change the missile trajectory.

Remember a patch or two ago where indirect missiles came in at extreme angle almost ignoring cover completely? Lets bring that but only against NARC'd targets. Now LRM's are down right Dangerous as long as that narc is up.

More combined arms and skill based approach.

Edited by Carrioncrows, 03 July 2013 - 03:59 AM.


#24 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:06 AM

View PostAim64C, on 03 July 2013 - 03:48 AM, said:

Snip


Everything is explained in the video, is it the best presentation? It was the easiest that allowed me to show multiple visual examples all the while allowing me to speak to give a better explanation.

But If you're unwilling to watch it and discover what those explanations are? Then our conversation isn't worth my time.

All of the points you are bringing up is addressed in the video.

#25 Throat Punch

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 874 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationNC, Terra

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:10 AM

I've got an easy answer why this will never work or be implemented. No one will like it, but I have your answer. Because its not in TT Battletech and/or how it works in Battletech TT. Sorry, but PGI has shown that while they will make subtle changes to the way TT rules works in a real time environment, they won't go full out and introduce anything that deviates too far from the source material.

#26 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:16 AM

View PostRadbane, on 03 July 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

With your system 4xLRM5 > 1xLRM20. I could charge up 4 missiels 5 steps faster than 1 missile 20 steps. Everyone would do LRM5's and fire more ofthen instead of the big launchers which would take ages to lock on. Didn't think this one through?


Provided each of those launchers were in a different location on the mech (1 LA, 1 RT, 1LT, 1 LA) then yes they would lock on much faster then a single LRM20.

This is a benefit to having a mech with hardpoints built towards a more Missile orientated role. It's what would make that mech Unique over all of the other drivel.

Now if all of the missiles were located in a single location they would be subject to the waterfall mechanic (See video)

However an LRM20 is both more powerful in direct fire mode as if your Targeting cursor wavered while the missiles were in flight you would only lose a few missiles 1-2 from the LRM20. But if it wavered with the 4 LRM5's you might end up losing 6-10 missiles in the same amount of time.

LRM would be much more powerful in indirect (Bombard Mode - Video again) as you would have a much bigger template in order to saturate a bigger area. Despite the fact you have 4 LRM5's they still only cover a small template area.

With a bigger template you would be able to hit more people and be dramatically easier to lead targets with the template and indirect fire them without needing a Lock on. As they move you can lay out launch LRM's that they would invariably end up walking into the template AOE's

View PostMorsdraco, on 03 July 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

I've got an easy answer why this will never work or be implemented. No one will like it, but I have your answer. Because its not in TT Battletech and/or how it works in Battletech TT. Sorry, but PGI has shown that while they will make subtle changes to the way TT rules works in a real time environment, they won't go full out and introduce anything that deviates too far from the source material.


Lol. Check your source material closer this is EXACTLY TableTop.

#27 Throat Punch

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 874 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationNC, Terra

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:24 AM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 03 July 2013 - 04:16 AM, said:

Lol. Check your source material closer this is EXACTLY TableTop.


I'll admit i didn't watch your video (hard to watch anything with any kind of focus when a 4 year old wants you to play Transformers on your desk), but I'm looking at the Master rules right now and I can't find anything like what you are suggesting in them in regards to missiles. If I am recalling incorrectly, or simply aren't looking in the right spot, please let me know where I need to look this up. Not being a smart *** or a troll just want to see the TT rules that are like what you propose because in all my years of playing I can't remember anything similar to what you propose, and I've played a long time. It may just be a case of me not completely understanding what you are talking about as well. Again that happens when you are distracted by a 4 year old.

#28 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,644 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 05:34 AM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 03 July 2013 - 01:04 AM, said:


1. You didn't watch the video. It addresses all of these issues you explains why in more depth.

Don't count on anyone watching the video.
Of course, you can't count on anyone reading a long post, either.
So, I suppose... good luck. :)

I think I like your idea. I always thought that indirect fire mode and direct fire mode should be two distinct "things", and that aiming missiles should work more like aiming lasers - hold on target for a duration, and the better you held on target, the better your missiles hit. This would also allow different interaction with ECM and other stuff.

Here's what I would want from a revamped missile system:
  • Indirect Fire and Direct Fire are two different modes
  • Direct Fire requires aiming skill just like firing a laser does (for ex. , press the fire button, hold on target for a second, and depending on how good you were, your missiles will hit).
  • Indirect Fire requires less aiming skill, but more tactical understanding. It's overall less effecient then direct-fire, but has the benefit that no one fires back at you while you're dishing it out. Indirect-Fire spotting can benefit from the aiming skill of your spotters, and their modules/efficiencies/gear.

I would love to see a game where a dedicated spotter sees the enemy team, marks multiple enemies with Narc, retreats, and then the LRM boats open fire. (Bonus fun if PPCs can disable Narc emitters, and the enemy team starts shooting its own to stop the rain).

And I would love to see non-LRM boats being able to integrate LRMs in their normal firing routine with direct-fire weapons.

ECM just diverting missiles, not outright stopping locks. AMS not negating an LRM5 user but being useless against a LRM80 boat...

#29 Aim64C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 05:51 AM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 03 July 2013 - 04:06 AM, said:



Everything is explained in the video, is it the best presentation? It was the easiest that allowed me to show multiple visual examples all the while allowing me to speak to give a better explanation.

But If you're unwilling to watch it and discover what those explanations are? Then our conversation isn't worth my time.

All of the points you are bringing up is addressed in the video.


I think we have a different idea of how this would end up working in-game - which is why you feel you've addressed the points that I say your system doesn't adequately address.

You've got a good system for SRMs. It won't really work all that well for LRMs. It would "be nice" so that Streak LRMs could be implemented using a similar system in the future - but that is years away.

About the only suggestion I could see for getting LRMs to work is if you had a sort of minimum percentage in regards to missile lock and then a 'max time to all missiles locking' based on environmental factors. Say, 30% of your missiles instantly lock while it takes, maybe, 2-3 seconds to lock on with all LRMs. This would allow streak LRMs to be implemented later, and more accurately represent a simulation of missile lock behavior (rather than just each missile locking on sequentially when the process can happen in parallel).

It could also add a different level of functionality to the NARC - allowing all missiles fired on a NARCed mech to be literal 'fire and forget' - with the missiles homing in on the signal instantly.

That would actually make NARC worth taking over TAG for scouts spotting for their team.

If you were to go about it that way - I'd say you had a more workable solution. Though the presentation would need to be altered a bit. I would suggest a growling similar to that of the Sidewinder that gives a relative strength of your lock with some kind of indicator around your reticule echoing the same. It wouldn't necessarily tell you how many missiles are locked - just the relative strength of your lock (which would translate roughly to what percentage of missiles properly guide to the target). That way, your UI isn't cluttered with 40 dots the size of your arm-target pipper.

#30 Skyfaller

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,332 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 06:05 AM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 02 July 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:


The video introduces you to an entire new vison mode that you can switch to for the purpose of indirect firing LRM's and "other" mech mounted artillery.

Posted Image


I have creamed my pants. This image here is PERFECT and what I'd love to see.

LRM's should have a 'grid fire' mode toggle like that. The spread when firing them in that mode would be very wide so as to do an area bombardment. Low damage but damage is damage.



I disagree with your concept of 'this would take skill' ... its idiotic and uneducated. By your definition, PPC and ballistics are just as disgustingly 'no skill' than missiles because you just have to aim once, fire and forget. They travel much faster than an LRM and while they do not track they also don't force the player to expose himself or have a friendly expose himself to getting shot as the missiles fly in.

It is better to have 2 ppcs and 2 LRM20s than to have 4 LRM15s. Know why? the PPC can fire twice while the LRM20 volley is in the air..it hits one location. Aiming? Not a problem since I have to keep the enemy mech in my sights to keep the lock..it takes ZERO skill to mouse over the mech itself and not into the thin air inside the lock-box (which is just 5% of the lock box area..the rest is filled by the enemy mech). LRMs are fine as they are now.

That being said, I do like your concept of analog firing ... but not in the same application and perspective.

How about this:

Make TAG change the missile 'center of mech' impact point to be wherever the TAG is lasing. Right now the missiles all home in on the CT but spread out following their hard-coded missile spread. With this new system, if my TAG is shining on the mech's RT then it will become the centerpoint of damage. This will make the LRM more effective in terms of splash damage application IF the TAG aim is good. However it can also be a disaster if the TAG is aiming at an arm or a leg..most missiles in the spread could miss the mech entirely.

#31 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 11:01 AM

View PostMorsdraco, on 03 July 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:


I'll admit i didn't watch your video (hard to watch anything with any kind of focus when a 4 year old wants you to play Transformers on your desk), but I'm looking at the Master rules right now and I can't find anything like what you are suggesting in them in regards to missiles. If I am recalling incorrectly, or simply aren't looking in the right spot, please let me know where I need to look this up. Not being a smart *** or a troll just want to see the TT rules that are like what you propose because in all my years of playing I can't remember anything similar to what you propose, and I've played a long time. It may just be a case of me not completely understanding what you are talking about as well. Again that happens when you are distracted by a 4 year old.



Maximum Tech I believe is where you will find LRM "Bombardment" or using LRM's in a indirect fire mode to saturate an area rather than direct fire them.

If you are talking about the basic Analog Idea I am proposing it is in the basic rolls represented by a Missile Roll. In Battletech you rolled to hit, and if you hit you then rolled "How Many" missiles hit on the Missile Hit Table.

Instead of this being an arbitrary "Roll" this is simply controlled by how "WELL" the shot is placed and if they hold the targeting cursor over their target for both locking on and while missiles are in mid flight.

TAG, NARC and Artemis all play a roll in how fast you acquire lock on with your missiles as well as the Missile Lock Decay, how slow / fast your missiles lose lock. There are also other benefits that each one provide outlined in the video.

View PostMustrumRidcully, on 03 July 2013 - 05:34 AM, said:

Don't count on anyone watching the video.
Of course, you can't count on anyone reading a long post, either.
So, I suppose... good luck. :)

I think I like your idea. I always thought that indirect fire mode and direct fire mode should be two distinct "things", and that aiming missiles should work more like aiming lasers - hold on target for a duration, and the better you held on target, the better your missiles hit. This would also allow different interaction with ECM and other stuff.

Here's what I would want from a revamped missile system:
  • Indirect Fire and Direct Fire are two different modes
  • Direct Fire requires aiming skill just like firing a laser does (for ex. , press the fire button, hold on target for a second, and depending on how good you were, your missiles will hit).
  • Indirect Fire requires less aiming skill, but more tactical understanding. It's overall less effecient then direct-fire, but has the benefit that no one fires back at you while you're dishing it out. Indirect-Fire spotting can benefit from the aiming skill of your spotters, and their modules/efficiencies/gear.
I would love to see a game where a dedicated spotter sees the enemy team, marks multiple enemies with Narc, retreats, and then the LRM boats open fire. (Bonus fun if PPCs can disable Narc emitters, and the enemy team starts shooting its own to stop the rain).

And I would love to see non-LRM boats being able to integrate LRMs in their normal firing routine with direct-fire weapons.

ECM just diverting missiles, not outright stopping locks. AMS not negating an LRM5 user but being useless against a LRM80 boat...


Everything you just said here is "EXACTLY" what I proposed in the video - down to a "T" with the exception of the NARC. My NARC the missiles come in at a higher trajectory making them much harder for targets to go to cover.

View PostSkyfaller, on 03 July 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:


I have creamed my pants. This image here is PERFECT and what I'd love to see.

LRM's should have a 'grid fire' mode toggle like that. The spread when firing them in that mode would be very wide so as to do an area bombardment. Low damage but damage is damage.



I disagree with your concept of 'this would take skill' ... its idiotic and uneducated. By your definition, PPC and ballistics are just as disgustingly 'no skill' than missiles because you just have to aim once, fire and forget. They travel much faster than an LRM and while they do not track they also don't force the player to expose himself or have a friendly expose himself to getting shot as the missiles fly in.

It is better to have 2 ppcs and 2 LRM20s than to have 4 LRM15s. Know why? the PPC can fire twice while the LRM20 volley is in the air..it hits one location. Aiming? Not a problem since I have to keep the enemy mech in my sights to keep the lock..it takes ZERO skill to mouse over the mech itself and not into the thin air inside the lock-box (which is just 5% of the lock box area..the rest is filled by the enemy mech). LRMs are fine as they are now.

That being said, I do like your concept of analog firing ... but not in the same application and perspective.

How about this:

Make TAG change the missile 'center of mech' impact point to be wherever the TAG is lasing. Right now the missiles all home in on the CT but spread out following their hard-coded missile spread. With this new system, if my TAG is shining on the mech's RT then it will become the centerpoint of damage. This will make the LRM more effective in terms of splash damage application IF the TAG aim is good. However it can also be a disaster if the TAG is aiming at an arm or a leg..most missiles in the spread could miss the mech entirely.



PPC's and Ballistics DO require skill. They require leading a target, anticipating where they are going to move and trying to make those two points line up.

This is play in the form of the above and skill to represent how well you can place your shot and their is counter play in the enemy being evasive to make you miss your shot or rolling torso to make you hit a unintended location.

All of this is a definition of skill and requires active participation.

As for where missiles are impacting the Developers has already got the code necessary for missiles to randomly strike a mech's skeletal structure - in other words once launched some each missile will individually target a location on a mech - Left Arm, Right Leg, Left torso, Right torso, ect ect

Tag would just speed up Lock on times, decrease missile decay, and allow LRM's to be used without LOS.

#32 Soy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,689 posts
  • Locationtrue Lord system

Posted 03 July 2013 - 11:02 AM

What the

i don't even

#33 Corvus Antaka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 8,310 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationInner Sphere

Posted 03 July 2013 - 12:41 PM

I like the picture, but i dont see the value otherwise.

#34 Monky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,219 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:05 PM

I like the feel of the idea if nothing else, and if it is done well it could work pretty smartly.

#35 Unbound Inferno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,168 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:06 PM

It can't be done well. You are gimping LRM boats because their range is within that of a sniper's, its only effective for indirect fire and if anyone spots you its either drop the missile lock and run or die. To top it off, you can't regain lost ones.

Its a bad idea.

#36 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:46 PM

View PostUnbound Inferno, on 03 July 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

It can't be done well. You are gimping LRM boats because their range is within that of a sniper's, its only effective for indirect fire and if anyone spots you its either drop the missile lock and run or die. To top it off, you can't regain lost ones.

Its a bad idea.


Quoted for a man you fails to read.

LRM MAX RANGE = 1500
LRM Effective Range = 1000

After the missiles cross the 1000m threshold, missiles begin to lose lock until they hit what they are aiming at, hit something or hit 1500m.

Which makes them the quintessential sniper weapon provided you can get someone to lock up a target for you.

Edited by Carrioncrows, 03 July 2013 - 04:49 PM.


#37 zolop

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 284 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 05:27 PM

Why do we need this system? Does it promote another gameplay layer than just to have a precision mouse? Being able to bombard a area with LRMs or missles is a good idea, brings another support role to the game, I just can't fathom why the lock on system needs to be more complicated with missle salvos. I can understand having a second firing option (but keeping the first firing option like the current system), as that is just giving a different firing option not forcing a new on the player. MAybe make this as a second firing option for FnF missles LRMs, Streaks, SRM etc, otherwise I wouldn't be against it as much, not many of us would be if it was a firing option and not forced.

Quote

...
To top it off, the mechanics in this game can't support it. They have an in-system mechanic to maintain the missile launch, spread and target flightpath. The entire thing would need to be reworked to have this so each missile follows their own individual flightpath and tracking instead of a simpler group listing. Instead of having 4 launchers to track it would need to follow 40, 60.. 80 different missiles. It would never be done for that alone. To say nothing of how horrible it makes LRMs to use in any aspect of the game except for that indirect level.

Right now there isn't a reason for it that would evolve the game within the current MWO missle system, except if we could use the LRMS for indirect bombardment on a given place on the battle area. The Bombardment was the second idea right?

Edited by zolop, 03 July 2013 - 05:35 PM.


#38 DYSEQTA

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Stone Cold
  • 347 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 03 July 2013 - 05:31 PM

Posted Image

#39 Aim64C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 07:20 PM

View PostCarrioncrows, on 03 July 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:



Quoted for a man you fails to read.

LRM MAX RANGE = 1500
LRM Effective Range = 1000

After the missiles cross the 1000m threshold, missiles begin to lose lock until they hit what they are aiming at, hit something or hit 1500m.

Which makes them the quintessential sniper weapon provided you can get someone to lock up a target for you.


This is a no-go.

LRMs should perform according to thrust kinematics. They launch, climb, and drop into their target based on lead-pursuit guidance and compensation for gravitational pull. Since we are operating in surface-to-surface environments, an initial climb and 'cruise' when the launcher does not have LOS to the target would be acceptable.

Optimizing missile performance to intercept targets at 1000 meters on a level playing field (they fall short if beyond that); elevation would give missiles an added range bonus (something no other weapon in this game actually gets). Missiles would not self-destruct, but continue until they collide with an object (they are not proximity fused shrapnel-based warheads - makes no sense other than avoiding collateral damage for them to self-destruct - and we know how the InnerSphere feels about collateral damage).

So long as they have kinetic energy - they will continue to pursue their target (which means effective intercepts against faster mechs are possible at shorter ranges where kinetic energy is high and lower at longer ranges where kinetic energy is low).

Your missile lock idea could be implemented - with 'unlocked' missiles only command-guiding while those 'locked' home in on a random bone (torso section) so long as lock is held until a terminal guidance phase (at which point, the unlocked LRMs cease guidance). This would give Streak LRMs a more lore-centric role.

The caveat, here, is that once a mech is selected and locked - some 40% of your missiles start locked, with a percentage increase in the number of missiles locked over time - so, at T0 - 40% of your missiles are locked. At T1, 60%, at T2, 75%, T3, 95% - at 4 seconds or longer, all missiles would be locked unless guidance is lost (and that would simply reverse the trend).

Though missile performance would have to be radically improved - with velocities in the 300+ m/s range and per-missile damage something in the range of 1.4 - 1.6 per missile.

#40 Carrioncrows

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 10:21 PM

View PostAim64C, on 03 July 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

Snip


Lol, who wants complicated mechanics now?

Actually I would be fine if LRM's Range extended depending on how high your elevation is, now not just LRM's but all missile weapons.

That....makes for some exceptionally nice play and counter-play with having players maneuvering for advantageous spots.

The idea on the 1000m effective range and the 1500m maximum range is based simply on giving all missiles a maximum range = effective range + (50% of effective range) - or 150% maximum range.

For instance all energy weapons have a maximum range equal to double their effective and ballistics have a maximum equal to tripple their effective. The idea was to give missiles 150% to keep the trend.

Missiles: 150%
Energy: 200%
Ballistics: 300%

With the exception of
Regular Lasers, Pulse lasers, SRM's, streaks, flamer, MG and the AC20 all other weapons in the game out range the LRM.

Now when you exceed your effective range with these weapons what normally happens? The damage drops off in a liniar fashion.

So what would happen with missiles once they exceeded their effective range? Easy, The missile icons begin to unfill as missiles begin to lose lock.

In practical terms I chalked this up to the rigors of combat specifically Electronics and jamming and other forms of EW. The missiles would work much like a guided missile. As in the missile itself is directed via the actual mech rather than any on board missile guidance.

Once a missile exceeded a certain range the missile's guidance would no longer be able to power through the interference and the missile would lose "Lock" as telemetry information was lost. itself would no longer able to

Technically in Battletech terms SRM's were capable of hitting targets across the world provided they had fuel, or kinetic energy as you might call it, they simply didn't have strong enough guidance computers that could reliably maintain signal strength passed the 270m

If you are really into the technical mumbo jumbo.

so
LRM's: 1000m effective - 1500m maximum
SRM's 270 effective - 405 maximum

Missiles pass effective range they begin to lose lock, now depending on Artemis, Tag, NARC, or streaks is how fast or how slow they lose lock normally and how slow / fast they lose lock passed their effective range.

Streaks
The way i set up streaks was that they achieved lock a bit faster, had longer missile decay times, had better "Missile Agility" as well as they could not be fired unless the launcher achieved a full lock with all missiles for that launcher.

So a person could hold down the trigger with out a 'Premature Launch' or launching before all missiles have achieved lock.

For instance you are chasing down a target and right as you fire your target jinks to the left causing your targeting cursor to come off target for a moment causing missile icons to unfill and lose lock. Now a regular SRM launcher would launch the whole wave, the missiles that did achieve lock would track and the rest would dumb fire straight where they are aimed.

But streaks wouldn't fire until all missile icons are filled in so after you reacquire your target you could just hold down the fire button and the streaks fire once a full lock is achieved.

Now that doesn't guarantee all missiles will hit, you still have to keep your targeting cursor on target for the duration of the missile flight and wavering could cost you missiles - Not as much as regular SRM's as your guidance system is a bit better and the missiles don't lose lock as easily.

I hope this clears things up.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users