260 replies to this topic

[Roland]

Quote

If you're speaking of the 'sensing' 'mech, receiving the seismic data, maybe, IF, we're to believe the seismic data is being generated at each 'mech. It's quite probable and tremendously more 'doable' that our base has the seismic sensors and our 'mechs are receiving data transmitted from the base. Then having direct contact with the ground or our own movement would have little to no affect on what data was received.

Why do people keep saying stupid crap like this?

No, obviously the seismic sensor is not based on some kind of magical sensor embedded in the earth prior to the battle.

How do I know this? Because it has a freaking RANGE BASED ON YOUR LOCATION. If it was data transmitted from some other facility, then you'd just get the location of all mechs in the entire battlefield, all the time.

And all of that is moot anyway, because even if you can imagine some convoluted way to rationalize an unbalanced gameplay mechanism, that doesn't mean it's ok to have in the game.

"Oh, well I've got ships in orbit around the planet, so I should be able to call in an orbital strike and just nuke the enemy's DZ! HERPA DERP"

[Andross Deverow]

Aim64C, on 05 August 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Then why is its detection radius centered on our mech?

Engage brain.



The point. You missed it.

What does BAP do?

...

What does BAP require?

...

That's right. Tonnage on your mech and space.

Now... stay with me on this one...

What does Seismic do?

...

What does Seismic require?

...

That's right - nothing. You can add it into whatever build you want, and get the most powerful piece of sensing equipment in the game.

If ONLY you had joined a few months earlier... maybe THEN you could have the XP and credits to unlock this module that, apparently, 3/5 players have, because that's how many always seem to know when you're going to pop around a blind corner (even when you are approaching from an angle opposite the battle's facing).



Those modules, generally, serve to enhance existing equipment.

"Advanced Sensor Range" stacks with BAP. "360 degree target retention" works well with weapons that require a lock or as a light mech working as a forward observer for missiles (so you don't have to always stare at a target to provide data).

At no time do these modules introduce completely new features of the game. They serve to enhance components or strategies that are already viable.



There's a thing called reading comprehension. You might want to make an attempt at it.

Though it's cute that you think yourself intellectually relevant by comparison to me.



I have 40 points of damage prepped and ready to go onto whatever that little circle on my HUD floats over.

Do you -really- think I can't figure out that the center of the circle is your mech and have my weapons aligned to the hole it will be popping out of?



Ridiculous.

The word you are looking for is ridiculous. There is no 'e.'

You've never really shot at anything, have you?

Never seen an entire wing of helicopters pop up and take a whole battalion by surprise - even though spy satellites and AWACS have been up and running in the area for weeks. Or never spent five minutes exchanging fire with people 'on your side.'

But, I'll yield for a moment and simply ask:

"How has Seismic improved the game?"

Let's hear it. Tell me of a match where seismic truly enriched the depth of this game's experience. You're standing here and swearing by it - so I'll respect your claim to sentience long enough to give you a shot at validating yourself.

It enriched the depth of the cheese game experience..???

Regards

[Dimento Graven]

Rad Hanzo, on 05 August 2013 - 12:59 AM, said:

...Yup, it pretty much was nothing short of a PGI-sanctioned wallhack, but then again it was nowhere near the effectivity of ECM before BAP went soft-counter.

You people comparing seismic to a wall hack are being totally ridiculous, and you know it, or should. Wall hacks allows cheaters to pinpoint target your 'mech without being bothered by things such as terrain and terrain objects, so that the moment you stepped clear, BANG, you're being hit.

Seismic just provided a general idea of where you were at and maybe what direction you were heading AS LONG AS YOU WERE MOVING, and within a maximum 500 meter distance, and what's more, you can't actually TARGET via seismic, unlike wall hacks.

Wall hacks, have no such limitations.

Quote

Be honest guys, we all know that a loadout that ain´t boating is damnably hard to be made effective and relies on circumstances wayyyyyyy out of any players control, such as capable teammates (no thanks Matchmaker), balanced mech weights across rounds and even balanced weapon loadouts across rounds (and again... no thanks Matchmaker).

And dont even get me started on 4-man/8-man premades, as these should have their own separated queues for the love of the everburning hellfires and not ruin the "fun" of the total beginners.

Flame on...

Yes, if anything needs to be removed from the game it's the current match maker, and as far as I'm concerned the 4man/8man restrictions too. PGI told us over and over that it was PUGS doing MOST of the PUG stomping, not the pre-mades, but for some stupid idiotic spineless reason they implemented this BS 4/8 restriction anyway.

I've hated it since day 1.

[Mystere]

TDR3D, on 05 August 2013 - 01:55 AM, said:

Pretty much this. Though not using something out of a sense of honour or self-integrity is by definition scrubbery. I'm glad the thing was nerfed for the reasons that have been pointed out, as it actually hurt scout mechs more than it helped. I've viewed seismic as anti scout equipment rather than for scouting, so reading stuff like what the OP has written makes me sad, impotent and slightly flaccid.

I don't really get why people say the module is anti-scout. Is it because I am using it differently?

Other than the obvious benefits, I use it to deceive the enemy, especially if they're already under heavy fire, by making them think a big threat just appeared behind them and is slowly moving in, forcing them to move to less favorable positions. In doing this, I am relying on two basic principles:

• Humans have an inherent fear of the unknown.
  
• Humans will seek to destroy what they fear or do not understand.

It seems to work a lot of times in PUG games.

[Sug]

keith, on 02 August 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:

if they do anything it should be based on physics. a bigger object that is moving faster= bigger signal from from farther away.

Viktor Drake, on 02 August 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Make seismic work in a fashion that offers diminishing returns the large the mech it is mounted on.

Unfortunately ideas like those require actual programming where changing the range of seismic involves changing a number.

PGI always goes for the easiest solution first. Then one that's slightly harder. Then one that's harder still... Then six months later if those simple changes didn't work they decided to actually fix the 6 month old problem.

[Dimento Graven]

Aim64C, on 05 August 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Then why is its detection radius centered on our mech?

Engage brain.

Yes, you should engage your brain. The answer is because of the limited computing technology, they only provide information immediately relevant to each individual 'mech receiving the information, pre-nerf that was 500 meters.

Quote

The point. You missed it.

What does BAP do?

...

What does BAP require?

...

That's right. Tonnage on your mech and space.

Now... stay with me on this one...

What does Seismic do?

...

What does Seismic require?

...

That's right - nothing. You can add it into whatever build you want, and get the most powerful piece of sensing equipment in the game.

If ONLY you had joined a few months earlier... maybe THEN you could have the XP and credits to unlock this module that, apparently, 3/5 players have, because that's how many always seem to know when you're going to pop around a blind corner (even when you are approaching from an angle opposite the battle's facing).

I got your point, and it's BS. BAP requires cash, something that you have to EARN through playing at least a few matches, and then of course, you have to trade off armor/ammo/weapons/slots for it too. It's not immediately available to everyone, unless you're willing to pay money to purchase 'mechs with it pre-equipped, or purchase a 'mech to immediately sell to get the cash to buy a BAP to put into your 'mech.

Yeah, the effectiveness of seismic is definitely greater than the effectiveness of BAP, and of course the ability to get it and its actual costs, reflect that.

And no, a newb shouldn't necessarily have 100% access to everything in the game, that includes seismic and EVERY OTHER module in game. Next you'll be stating the Pilot Tree needs to be removed because a newb doesn't have access to Torso Twist, Anchor Turn, et al.

Persistence and loyalty are rewarded.

Quote

Those modules, generally, serve to enhance existing equipment.

But by your logic, since they aren't immediately available to the person who hasn't yet even played his first game, should not be in the game at all.

Quote

"Advanced Sensor Range" stacks with BAP. "360 degree target retention" works well with weapons that require a lock or as a light mech working as a forward observer for missiles (so you don't have to always stare at a target to provide data).

At no time do these modules introduce completely new features of the game. They serve to enhance components or strategies that are already viable.

Again, not valid points. ECM was a new feature at one time. The 'enhanced' heat sincs was a "new feature" at one time. XL engines were a "new feature" at one time. Artillery strikes was a "new feature" at one time. BAP itself was a "new feature" at one time. What you seem to be saying is it's time to stop adding things to MWO, that PGI is in fact "finished" and you'd prefer they NOT add anything new, ever.

Quote

There's a thing called reading comprehension. You might want to make an attempt at it.

Though it's cute that you think yourself intellectually relevant by comparison to me.

Funny, I was thinking the EXACT same thing...

Quote

I have 40 points of damage prepped and ready to go onto whatever that little circle on my HUD floats over.

Do you -really- think I can't figure out that the center of the circle is your mech and have my weapons aligned to the hole it will be popping out of?

With pin point accuracy? With the ability to target an already damaged area?

No, I don't. Yeah you can make a guess of which hole, and maybe when, and more often than not you'll be near enough correct that a majority of your 40 point alpha might hit most of the time. But it's NOTHING like an actual wall hack you and your shrill ilk having been comparing it to.

Nothing at all, and it seems like you're lucky enough to have never had the misfortune of playing against someone with an obvious wall hack going to know what that's like, and I have to say, it's a good thing for you, I wish I could say the same.

Quote

Ridiculous.

The word you are looking for is ridiculous. There is no 'e.'

Yes, my point was so arguable the only thing you could fault me on was my spelling? Yeah, rediculous...

Quote

You've never really shot at anything, have you?

Never seen an entire wing of helicopters pop up and take a whole battalion by surprise - even though spy satellites and AWACS have been up and running in the area for weeks. Or never spent five minutes exchanging fire with people 'on your side.'

Apples and oranges my friend. I can't recall any recent action involving any non-man portable equipment where US forces were 'surprised' by their presence. But admittedly, I no longer am in a position to be in the know.

Quote

But, I'll yield for a moment and simply ask:

"How has Seismic improved the game?"

Let's hear it. Tell me of a match where seismic truly enriched the depth of this game's experience. You're standing here and swearing by it - so I'll respect your claim to sentience long enough to give you a shot at validating yourself.

Easy, again, it's eliminated the completely rediculous notion that a 25 to 100 ton machine, STOMPING, around at its top speed could be 100% stealthed until the moment it decides to pop out in a direction an opponent happens to be facing.

This was not something at all easily possible in the whole lore of BattleTech. I've yet to see any references to actual "stealth" 'mechs in BT, at least, that weren't shut down to the point of near inoperability. Those "stealthed" 'mechs certainly were NOT mobile, or had a ready charge in the weapons. Nor was it possible to "sneak up" unseen behind a 'mech because all 'mechs had, at the least, 360 degree viewing.

[Dimento Graven]

Roland, on 05 August 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

Why do people keep saying stupid crap like this?

No, obviously the seismic sensor is not based on some kind of magical sensor embedded in the earth prior to the battle.

How do I know this? Because it has a freaking RANGE BASED ON YOUR LOCATION. If it was data transmitted from some other facility, then you'd just get the location of all mechs in the entire battlefield, all the time.

And all of that is moot anyway, because even if you can imagine some convoluted way to rationalize an unbalanced gameplay mechanism, that doesn't mean it's ok to have in the game.

"Oh, well I've got ships in orbit around the planet, so I should be able to call in an orbital strike and just nuke the enemy's DZ! HERPA DERP"

It's limited to each 'mech capable of receiving the information, and the information that's most immediately relevant to the 'mech for the purposes of limiting the computing necessary to process, that's why it is the way it is.

I love how you consider seismic sensor "magical"... You do know that those "magical" sensors can determine the exact epicenter of an earthquake from the other side of the planet don't you?

You do know that seismic sensing is how they determine when and where someone has illegally detonated an atomic bomb, again from the other side of the planet, don't you?

There's quite a bit of reality to base this game feature on actually.

If you're asking why when 20+ LRMs hit the earth next to you don't see false read on your seismic sensors, I'd agree with you, it should, that would help the increase the immersiveness of the game in my mind.

As far as your moronic notion of using nukes, if you knew anything about the BattleTech universe you'd know that the use of nukes is prohibited by the Ares convention, and would result in all Houses immediately aligning against you.

[Aim64C]

Dimento Graven, on 05 August 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Yes, you should engage your brain. The answer is because of the limited computing technology, they only provide information immediately relevant to each individual 'mech receiving the information, pre-nerf that was 500 meters.

. . .

So, rather than simply providing grid coordinate data of sensor contacts - the "limited computing technology" decides to poll the coordinates of all friendlies, then run a vector-based Boolean calculation (for each friendly with the module) to determine whether or not the contact is within x meters?

That's only one of the most computationally expensive operations one can perform.

Quote

I got your point, and it's BS. BAP requires cash, something that you have to EARN through playing at least a few matches, and then of course, you have to trade off armor/ammo/weapons/slots for it too. It's not immediately available to everyone, unless you're willing to pay money to purchase 'mechs with it pre-equipped, or purchase a 'mech to immediately sell to get the cash to buy a BAP to put into your 'mech.

I had BAP on my Catapult within the first 10 matches of play. With Artemis on my launchers. Endo Steel and double heat sinks followed within about 30 matches. By time I was at the 100 match mark, I was running a 280 XL and had more than enough ammo to keep my launchers supplied for a match.

Quote

Yeah, the effectiveness of seismic is definitely greater than the effectiveness of BAP, and of course the ability to get it and its actual costs, reflect that.

So, can I get a module that allows me to hack into an enemy mech and shut it down for 10 seconds?

It'd be just like the battlemech tazer, except I wouldn't have to aim or actually "hit" the target. Just be facing it its general direction.

To compensate - it will require 50,000 GXP to unlock and 20,000,000 C-bills to install.

Quote

And no, a newb shouldn't necessarily have 100% access to everything in the game, that includes seismic and EVERY OTHER module in game. Next you'll be stating the Pilot Tree needs to be removed because a newb doesn't have access to Torso Twist, Anchor Turn, et al.

That's not what I'm saying, at all. I'm saying that the module offers capability that is stupidly overpowered compared to what other modules offer, for one, and that it offers overwhelming advantages when coupled with nearly doubling of firepower and mobility that comes from the inclusion of "advanced tech" that doesn't come as part of the standard mech purchase.

Quote

Persistence and loyalty are rewarded.

But by your logic, since they aren't immediately available to the person who hasn't yet even played his first game, should not be in the game at all.

Please, quote me. Where did I say that?

Quote

Again, not valid points. ECM was a new feature at one time. The 'enhanced' heat sincs was a "new feature" at one time. XL engines were a "new feature" at one time. Artillery strikes was a "new feature" at one time. BAP itself was a "new feature" at one time. What you seem to be saying is it's time to stop adding things to MWO, that PGI is in fact "finished" and you'd prefer they NOT add anything new, ever.

You keep beating this drum - yet I've already provided you with a link that shows you how Information Warfare should be implemented in this game. Created by myself, I might add. Which introduced altered functionality for existing components, suggested modules for those roles, and how to go about implementing components that do not currently exist in our 'timeline.'

And, no, XL engines were never a 'new' feature. They've been a part of the game. BAP has been around since Battletech began.

Quote

Funny, I was thinking the EXACT same thing...

Except I test at the 99 percentile consistently.

Quote

With pin point accuracy? With the ability to target an already damaged area?

No, I don't. Yeah you can make a guess of which hole, and maybe when, and more often than not you'll be near enough correct that a majority of your 40 point alpha might hit most of the time. But it's NOTHING like an actual wall hack you and your shrill ilk having been comparing it to.

*shrug*

Believe what you want to. In the hands of a competent individual, it is no different from a wall hack.

Quote

Easy, again, it's eliminated the completely rediculous notion that a 25 to 100 ton machine, STOMPING, around at its top speed could be 100% stealthed until the moment it decides to pop out in a direction an opponent happens to be facing.

Perhaps you should use your ears.

Rather than relying upon the ridiculous notion that a bipedal machine can be equipped with sensors that allow it to resolve both vector and distance to seismic activity while doing anything other than standing absolutely still.

Even then, the ability to detect compression waves at the surface is horribly muted.

Quote

This was not something at all easily possible in the whole lore of BattleTech. I've yet to see any references to actual "stealth" 'mechs in BT, at least, that weren't shut down to the point of near inoperability. Those "stealthed" 'mechs certainly were NOT mobile, or had a ready charge in the weapons. Nor was it possible to "sneak up" unseen behind a 'mech because all 'mechs had, at the least, 360 degree viewing.

And here is where you blew it.

You had an opportunity to tell me of how this module enriched your gaming experience - how it led to more tactical diversity.

And you decided to talk about how, in battletech, the lore disagrees with non-omniscient Mechwarriors (which I can assure you is quite false).

The 360 degree "vision" was limited in scope and utility. It was more like an advanced rear-view mirror system with some targeting ****.

In the lore - battlemechs "snuck up" on each other all the time. The Clans hated that about the Inner Sphere - that they would sneak about and launch surprise attacks (both strategically and tactically).

[Angel of Annihilation]

Aim64C, on 05 August 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

And here is where you blew it.

You had an opportunity to tell me of how this module enriched your gaming experience - how it led to more tactical diversity.

And you decided to talk about how, in battletech, the lore disagrees with non-omniscient Mechwarriors (which I can assure you is quite false).

The 360 degree "vision" was limited in scope and utility. It was more like an advanced rear-view mirror system with some targeting ****.

In the lore - battlemechs "snuck up" on each other all the time. The Clans hated that about the Inner Sphere - that they would sneak about and launch surprise attacks (both strategically and tactically).

I have read virtually every battletech novel in existance and here is where your wrong.

360 degree view was the default vision capability of every mech in Battletech. It compressed the rear view into a 180 degree arc but it was all visable to a forward facing pilot. Additionally if any enemy mech visually appeared on the screen, it was immediately tagged by IFF as friendly or foe and if foe, could be target locked and engaged with any weapon that had the target within its firing arc. This is why quite a few mechs had rear facing weapons.

In battletech lore, most sneaking up had more to do with distraction than actually sneaking which is the exact reason why it was still possible to flank an sneak up on a seismic equiped mech. We as humans can't focus on everything at once. You got two assaults in your face, your not watching the minimap for little read dots, your watching the two assaults. A skilled user of seismic would note this by looking at his map, realize that your attention was likely on the two assaults in front of you and then use "Distraction" to sneak up on you and kill you.

Additionaly sneaking in battletech wasn't being able to get to within 50m of the enemy without them noticing like lights pilots apparently want to do, it was being able to get into weapons range without them noticing. We are talking 800-1000m well beyond the range of the non-nerfed seismic.

Ambushes did happen, usually from powered down, stationary mechs or at the very least low powered, stationary mechs in prepared positions and by prepared I mean, camoflagued and laced with heat screening camo nets (which they use currently in the U.S. armed forces). That however was about the only way to 100% insure a mech remained hidden until close range and even that was countered with BAP.

As far as the Inner Sphere tactics you are talking about, that wasn't sneaking in the general sense of the word, that was using deceptive tactics to win rather than the stand up fight the clan perfered. We are talking things like using mines or digging pitfalls. A prime example of this is when Kai Allard-Liao lured the Jade Falcons into that canyon and exploded the walls burying the entire cluster of enemy mechs. This was a "SNEAKY" tactic however it didn't involve mechs roaming about like Ninjas.

Lastly, mechs sneak about as well, actually probably less well than actual tanks do today. You can hear the rumble of a MBT at least a half mile off using nothing but your ears. Therefore I can pretty much guarentee you that a walking building weighing 100ton and standing 18m tall isn't going to sneak anywhere, especially not 1000 years in the furture with the enemy using advance sensors like....Oh I don't know...SEISMIC!!

Edited by Viktor Drake, 05 August 2013 - 10:01 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Aim64C, on 05 August 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

. . .
So, rather than simply providing grid coordinate data of sensor contacts - the "limited computing technology" decides to poll the coordinates of all friendlies, then run a vector-based Boolean calculation (for each friendly with the module) to determine whether or not the contact is within x meters?

That's only one of the most computationally expensive operations one can perform.

Only now do it for the entire map and THEN how expensive does it get?

The filtering is cheap and easy as I'm sure you know, IFF could easily report friendlies, and their locations, allowing limitation to sections of ground 500 meters in diameter of only those 'mechs capable of receiving the info.

Again, much easier than doing that for an entire map space.

Quote

I had BAP on my Catapult within the first 10 matches of play. With Artemis on my launchers. Endo Steel and double heat sinks followed within about 30 matches. By time I was at the 100 match mark, I was running a 280 XL and had more than enough ammo to keep my launchers supplied for a match.

Good for you, maybe that's average for the player base, maybe not. The point is, NONE of the enhancements you laud now were immediately available to you.

Quote

So, can I get a module that allows me to hack into an enemy mech and shut it down for 10 seconds?

It'd be just like the battlemech tazer, except I wouldn't have to aim or actually "hit" the target. Just be facing it its general direction.

To compensate - it will require 50,000 GXP to unlock and 20,000,000 C-bills to install.

I doubt it. I don't know of such a thing being in BT/MW lore for the time period PGI is representing currently.

Seismic sensing on the other hand, that's part of lore.

Quote

That's not what I'm saying, at all. I'm saying that the module offers capability that is stupidly overpowered compared to what other modules offer, for one, and that it offers overwhelming advantages when coupled with nearly doubling of firepower and mobility that comes from the inclusion of "advanced tech" that doesn't come as part of the standard mech purchase.

That's an opinion. Me and many people who think like me, have a different opinion. It's not 'stupidly OP' or 'OP' at all. It's available to everyone who has earned enough XP, GXP, and cash to purchase it.

Quote

Please, quote me. Where did I say that?

And you try and council me on my reading comprehension? Reread what you quoted and tell me where I said you said it... I said, BY YOUR LOGIC... Your argument that because this particular feature isn't immediately available to someone who hasn't even played his first game yet, is a false argument, because this game is LOADED with crap that's not available until you've earned enough cash, XP, and GXP to purchase/activate it, something you well know. You just don't like the feature, and don't want to put forth the effort to learn new tactics to counter it, so you're grabbing at every hair brained argument to justify it's current nerfed to near nothingness state.

Quote

You keep beating this drum - yet I've already provided you with a link that shows you how Information Warfare should be implemented in this game. Created by myself, I might add. Which introduced altered functionality for existing components, suggested modules for those roles, and how to go about implementing components that do not currently exist in our 'timeline.'

I don't give two ***** about what you pulled out of your butt, I asked about where in the BT/MW lore we have 'stealthed' 'mechs moving AT TOP SPEED with weapon charges at the ready. I too can make up as much neato-cheato enhancements to fit my wants for this game, too bad if it flies in the face of some 30 years of lore, and no, I'm not stating that game lore is sacrosanct either. There's enough 'compromises' in MWO already in the name 'game play' that that pipe dream has long been busted.

Quote

And, no, XL engines were never a 'new' feature. They've been a part of the game. BAP has been around since Battletech began.

First off in this instance, we're talking about MWO features and their introduction in the development cycle of MWO. I seem to recall, and I may be misremembering here, that XL engines were introduced mid-way through closed beta, making them a new feature at the time. BAP was introduced around the same time as ECM as I recall, just before going open beta, if I remember the time line correctly, so at that time it was a new feature. If you've only been playing since open beta, then there's a lot you may not realize.

Quote

Except I test at the 99 percentile consistently.

And you're so intelligent you assume that I don't either? You certainly seem arrogant enough to believe that you do anyway...

Quote

*shrug*

Believe what you want to. In the hands of a competent individual, it is no different from a wall hack.

You're so full of crap... Either you regularly use wall hacks and somehow have first hand experience, or, you're making one hell of an assumption. Facing an opponent using a wall hack, turning a corner, only to be headshot and have the same individual do it repeatedly, as opposed to facing an opponent who knows you're about to turn the corner, but not actually certain of your 'mech's build, height, speed, torso direction, et al, are light year's different, regardless of your supposed 'competency'.

Quote

Perhaps you should use your ears.

Rather than relying upon the ridiculous notion that a bipedal machine can be equipped with sensors that allow it to resolve both vector and distance to seismic activity while doing anything other than standing absolutely still.

Even then, the ability to detect compression waves at the surface is horribly muted.

Yeah, somehow differentiate 100% of the time, all the other battle noise going on around me at the time, and count on the fact that maybe TS3/CC/Ventrillo is not active enough to hide that noise so that I might just happen to hear the slight concussive noise the game allows 'mechs to make as they step.

Of course if it's as easy as you say it is, then seismic is working based off that, and it makes sense then, because of course if it's easy to hear and distinguish as you're apparently implying, it's easy enough to have your 'mech's passive sensors do it too...

(continued because this forum has the too many quotes bug...)

Edited by Dimento Graven, 05 August 2013 - 10:14 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Dimento Graven, on 05 August 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

(continued because this forum has the too many quotes bug...)

Quote

And here is where you blew it.

You had an opportunity to tell me of how this module enriched your gaming experience - how it led to more tactical diversity.

And you decided to talk about how, in battletech, the lore disagrees with non-omniscient Mechwarriors (which I can assure you is quite false).

The 360 degree "vision" was limited in scope and utility. It was more like an advanced rear-view mirror system with some targeting ****.

In the lore - battlemechs "snuck up" on each other all the time. The Clans hated that about the Inner Sphere - that they would sneak about and launch surprise attacks (both strategically and tactically).

Nothing was blown here I assure you, obviously we were reading different stories, perhaps you're confusing RoboTech or something, I don't know. As far as 360 degree view, it was there, it was always there, and it was effective enough that no pilot was ever in the position of being unable to see that 'mech firing into his back, directly behind him. As far as other sensing, you're ignoring MAD (magnetic anomaly detection), which was as equally effective in sensing in 360 degrees as was seismic, it of course was even better than seismic because it could detect stationary, powered up 'mechs, due to the intense magnetic bubble/tube/donut required to maintain the fusion reaction, unlike seismic, which could only detect 'mechs that were moving based off the tremors they created when their 20 to 100 ton weight came smashing down each time they stepped.

As far as 'sneaking' no, what the Clans disliked about fighting IS is that the IS wouldn't always fight head on in one-on-one battles (though Kurita was noted as fighting in a very Clan like manner). If by "sneak" you mean lure Clan 'mechs into traps, where several non-moving LRM carrying 'mechs could missile to death their enemies, yeah Clans hated that... Diversionary tactics, Clans hated that...

But "stealthed" IS 'mechs... Hadn't read ANYTHING ANYWHERE about that...

Edited by Dimento Graven, 05 August 2013 - 10:19 AM.

[Roland]

Quote

You do know that those "magical" sensors can determine the exact epicenter of an earthquake from the other side of the planet don't you?

They don't work by being mounted on giant stompy robots, which are generating more seismic activity right on top of the location they are trying to detect signals from.

It's like using passive sonar and then just screaming into the sensor array. Or using a camera and shining a laser into the light sensor.

And again, ALL OF THIS IS MOOT, because the seismic sensor makes the gameplay worse, and more shallow.

[Aim64C]

Viktor Drake, on 05 August 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

I have read virtually every battletech novel in existance and here is where your wrong.

*rolls eyes*

Quote

360 degree view was the default vision capability of every mech in Battletech. It compressed the rear view into a 180 degree arc but it was all visable to a forward facing pilot. Additionally if any enemy mech visually appeared on the screen, it was immediately tagged by IFF as friendly or foe and if foe, could be target locked and engaged with any weapon that had the target within its firing arc. This is why quite a few mechs had rear facing weapons.

Most of that was limited to short range combat (200 meters or less).

It was more like expanding peripheral vision to 360 degrees.

Quote

In battletech lore, most sneaking up had more to do with distraction than actually sneaking which is the exact reason why it was still possible to flank an sneak up on a seismic equiped mech. We as humans can't focus on everything at once. You got two assaults in your face, your not watching the minimap for little read dots, your watching the two assaults. A skilled user of seismic would note this by looking at his map, realize that your attention was likely on the two assaults in front of you and then use "Distraction" to sneak up on you and kill you.

There was plenty of flittering between buildings to avoid detection in the lore.

Though, again, according to lore - Mechs didn't really have seismic sensors. That was up to dedicated support vehicles - which would pick up seismic readings, resolve a probable chassis based upon the gait, and direct friendly assets accordingly.

Quote

Additionaly sneaking in battletech wasn't being able to get to within 50m of the enemy without them noticing like lights pilots apparently want to do, it was being able to get into weapons range without them noticing. We are talking 800-1000m well beyond the range of the non-nerfed seismic.

I could have sworn much research was put into equipment like Null Signature... Which greatly reduced the emission profile of a mech and allowed it to operate virtually undetected by all but human eyes (well, and the Bloodhound Active Probe, once that came about).

Hardly worthwhile if that 360 degree vision thing was as potent of a tool as you claim.

Quote

Ambushes did happen, usually from powered down, stationary mechs or at the very least low powered, stationary mechs in prepared positions and by prepared I mean, camoflagued and laced with heat screening camo nets (which they use currently in the U.S. armed forces). That however was about the only way to 100% insure a mech remained hidden until close range and even that was countered with BAP.

There were plenty of "Surprise! Have an LBX to the back!" moments that existed outside of "look! A distraction!"

Quote

As far as the Inner Sphere tactics you are talking about, that wasn't sneaking in the general sense of the word, that was using deceptive tactics to win rather than the stand up fight the clan perfered. We are talking things like using mines or digging pitfalls. A prime example of this is when Kai Allard-Liao lured the Jade Falcons into that canyon and exploded the walls burying the entire cluster of enemy mechs. This was a "SNEAKY" tactic however it didn't involve mechs roaming about like Ninjas.

Yet it was specifically that role that the Bushwacker was designed for.

You're not entirely incorrect, here - but the point is that the Inner Sphere pilots would attack unannounced under just about any circumstance - both strategic and tactical.

Of course - if we made ECM... ECM... in stead of area-effect null-sig...

Quote

Lastly, mechs sneak about as well, actually probably less well than actual tanks do today. You can hear the rumble of a MBT at least a half mile off using nothing but your ears. Therefore I can pretty much guarentee you that a walking building weighing 100ton and standing 18m tall isn't going to sneak anywhere, especially not 1000 years in the furture with the enemy using advance sensors like....Oh I don't know...SEISMIC!!

Battlemechs operate using a fusion reactor that derives power directly from the rotating magnetic field generated within the reaction. That would be relatively noiseless. I would expect a Toyota Corolla to make as much noise while idle.

Motive force is provided through electroactive polymers known as "Myomer." These would, largely, be soundless spare for mechanical inefficiencies in the bearings.

Further, even when considering seismic, the average impact each step of a creature bears little resemblance to its 'falling' impact. Even while running.

Though, again, Mechs didn't carry seismic sensors. Those were mobile support vehicles that supported entire land offensives.

[Dimento Graven]

Roland, on 05 August 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

...

And again, ALL OF THIS IS MOOT, because the seismic sensor makes the gameplay worse, and more shallow.

That's your opinion, which I disagree with.

It was much richer, now, we're starting to see significant reductions in the amount of mediums being piloted because they're blind to those 100 ton 'mechs stomping around in front of them behind the hill 250+ meters (and it looks like from the games I played last night, that it's not even working at 200 meters any more), and they can't get any warning on that 25 ton light blazing along at 150+ kph immediately behind them.

There'll be less light 'mechs too, for similar reasons, but mostly, we'll be missing the medium 'mechs who lack the fire power to immediately take out a threat and who lack the armor to survive a direct encounter with an assault...

[Syrkres]

At this stage - loving seismic - I would ask that they remove it.

It is for the most part useless as a scouting tool.

It's only real use is to let you know when something is sneaking up behind you (very close).

I would rather have it removed and make scouts more important again.

If it were to have a slight boost in range it could become somewhat more of a scouting tool, but other than that it's too limited for scouting,

[Angel of Annihilation]

Roland, on 05 August 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

They don't work by being mounted on giant stompy robots, which are generating more seismic activity right on top of the location they are trying to detect signals from.

It's like using passive sonar and then just screaming into the sensor array. Or using a camera and shining a laser into the light sensor.

And again, ALL OF THIS IS MOOT, because the seismic sensor makes the gameplay worse, and more shallow.

Not sure if it was early in this post or not but I posted about how seismic works.

The stomp of the mech Siesmic is equiped on produces outward bound acustic waves. Let me reiterate a key word, OUTWARD. The waves flow away from the mech so the Seimisc sensor does not read those.

On the other hand all other mechs also produce outward flowing waves which would be seen as incoming waves to the Seismic equiped mech. These would reach the Seismic equiped mech and give distance and vector to epicenter.

This isn't made up by the way, this is how it works, just read up on seismic waves.

As far as your Moot point about Siesmic making the gameplay worse and more shallow I totally disagree with that. At this point I have probably a dozen or more posts outlining in detail the ways Seismic adds to the gameplay and especially adds to the tactical flexibility of a seismic equiped mech. Therefore your either not reading the forums on this topic or are refusing to accept that siesmic can and does contribute to alot of tactical flexibility if it is equiped.

Lastly, as I mentioned in another post, I can understand why many don't want it in game, mostly because you perfer the randomness of games without it, that I can understand. However when you blantantly decide to ignore reality and defend your position with falsehood, that irks me.

Light mechs do suffer a few disadvantages. If the enemy is using siesmic you can't just walk up behind them without them seeing you and it does make it easier for them to know which way to turn once you circle out of their view in a heated fight. I get that. However, most of you aren't seeing, no refusing to see is a better description, just what tactics and capabilities opened up to that same light mech using seismic and that blindness to the facts has managed to get Seismic nerfed so that most of those advantages are now gone. Now a light mech still can't walk up behind a seismic equiped mech and they still can use it to track you when you circle behind them but you lost all the informational advantages it gave.

I don't think I have ever been more irked by a gaming community in my life especially since this same blindness is also affecting many other aspects of the game as well, making it worse, not better.

Honestly, I think this might be the first game that I have played where the community causes it to fail, not the developer.

[Dimento Graven]

Aim64C, on 05 August 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

Most of that was limited to short range combat (200 meters or less).

It was more like expanding peripheral vision to 360 degrees.

Incorrect, it was significantly useful enough to have rear mounted weapons, and it was good enough to be able to effectively aim and fire.

That's a hell of a lot more than 'expanded peripheral vision'...

Quote

There was plenty of flittering between buildings to avoid detection in the lore.

Though, again, according to lore - Mechs didn't really have seismic sensors. That was up to dedicated support vehicles - which would pick up seismic readings, resolve a probable chassis based upon the gait, and direct friendly assets accordingly.

Yes, but 'flittering between buildings didn't mean 'invisible'. You knew something was there, but you didn't know what. If the building was dense enough metallically, your MAD sensors wouldn't be able to resolve what 'mech was there, but you still knew a 'mech was near by.

As far as 'support vehicles', what is our base if not a stationary 'support vehicle'...

Quote

I could have sworn much research was put into equipment like Null Signature... Which greatly reduced the emission profile of a mech and allowed it to operate virtually undetected by all but human eyes (well, and the Bloodhound Active Probe, once that came about).

Hardly worthwhile if that 360 degree vision thing was as potent of a tool as you claim.

You are, mostly, correct on that (http://www.sarna.net...i/Stealth_Armor) and admittedly on stealth armor as well, however, note it was mostly LosTech and current IS versions had severe limitations, such that it would be extremely rare to encounter on the battlefield, even more so since I don't believe PGI is yet up to the year that it is supposed to have been first re-prototyped in 3050, and given that's 3050 now, well, we shouldn't be having to deal with "stealthed" 'mechs yet.

However, if you're talking about adding it as a module to MWO, I'm down with that, I think it would add a lot more to the game having it, than not.

Quote

There were plenty of "Surprise! Have an LBX to the back!" moments that existed outside of "look! A distraction!"

I can't recall any that didn't also have some other mitigating factor that kept the enemy from being detected, like damaged sensors or extreme weather, or some other violent cacophony.

Quote

Yet it was specifically that role that the Bushwacker was designed for.

You're not entirely incorrect, here - but the point is that the Inner Sphere pilots would attack unannounced under just about any circumstance - both strategic and tactical.

Of course - if we made ECM... ECM... in stead of area-effect null-sig...

I agree ECM is not yet properly implemented in this game either.

Quote

Battlemechs operate using a fusion reactor that derives power directly from the rotating magnetic field generated within the reaction. That would be relatively noiseless. I would expect a Toyota Corolla to make as much noise while idle.

Motive force is provided through electroactive polymers known as "Myomer." These would, largely, be soundless spare for mechanical inefficiencies in the bearings.

Further, even when considering seismic, the average impact each step of a creature bears little resemblance to its 'falling' impact. Even while running.

Though, again, Mechs didn't carry seismic sensors. Those were mobile support vehicles that supported entire land offensives.

Don't forget the necessary flyback transformers necessary for charging and maintaining the charge of energy weapons. There's no way to hide that significant electronic and audible noise, the pumps necessary to shift coolant around for the heat sincs, and feed the fusion reactor fuel, and yes I completely disagree with your assessment of the sort of noise generated by 25 to 100 ton vehicles "STEPPING" would make. You could rubberize the soles of the 'mech 'foot' but that would only get you so far, just like on a tank, the 'slap' of the treads as the tank moves at speed is still frickin' loud no matter how you cover it. I can't imagine how you'd 'place' the 12.5 to 50 tons of weight on the ground 'silently', ESPECIALLY when moving 30 to 150+ kph...

There's just no way to do that, that makes sense realistically, or game lore-wise...

Edited by Dimento Graven, 05 August 2013 - 11:06 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Dimento Graven, on 05 August 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

That's your opinion, which I disagree with.

It was much richer, now, we're starting to see significant reductions in the amount of mediums being piloted because they're blind to those 100 ton 'mechs stomping around in front of them behind the hill 250+ meters (and it looks like from the games I played last night, that it's not even working at 200 meters any more), and they can't get any warning on that 25 ton light blazing along at 150+ kph immediately behind them.

There'll be less light 'mechs too, for similar reasons, but mostly, we'll be missing the medium 'mechs who lack the fire power to immediately take out a threat and who lack the armor to survive a direct encounter with an assault...

This is also a very valid point that I hadn't pick up on since I was primarily looking at Siesmic from the prespective of a light mech. I used Seismic on almost all my fast, skirmisher mechs including my QDs for exactly that reason, to be able to effectively plan out my fight in advance. With Siesmic range being reduced, It is going to be much hard to flank and use hit-and-run tactics because I will be effectively blind to where the enemy is most of the time and unlike a light mech which is a very small target that is hard to hit at speed, the QD is rather huge. I will probably see a fairly large reduction in the capabilites of the QD due to this change.

[Aim64C]

Dimento Graven, on 05 August 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

Only now do it for the entire map and THEN how expensive does it get?

. . .

A seismic station determines the grid coordinates of a contact based on simple trigonometry.

Ten clock cycles and you've got a hundred million of them per second.

Quote

The filtering is cheap and easy as I'm sure you know, IFF could easily report friendlies, and their locations, allowing limitation to sections of ground 500 meters in diameter of only those 'mechs capable of receiving the info.

Again, much easier than doing that for an entire map space.

No... not in the slightest.

Incidence angle of event station A, incidence angle of event station B. Distance Station A, Station B (known because someone built it according to some kind of plan or schematic). Use what you learned in trigonometry, and now you have an estimated third point to your triangle. Since you know the grid coordinates of station A and station B - you have a good idea of where the seismic event occurred.

Send out data packet to friendlies that says: "Seismic event [coordinates]."

All friendlies now know where activity is taking place.

Trying to figure out who is within 500 meters requires you to send and receive each unit's reported coordinates.

So you receive a unit's coordinate, and have to do one of two computations: "Is [event x] within 500 meters of [unit y]" or "Within 500 meters of [Unit x] list all [event y]." Since you have no idea of knowing which one will yield the more efficient result (do you start with the events or start with the units? ... depends upon the scenario) - you have to pick one and roll with it as the programmer.

1300 clock cycles later, you've figured out that there are two seismic events within range of a given unit.

You are, basically, running 2d collision detection on a smooth body. http://stackoverflow...ed-line-segment

Something similar to that problem.

And it's computationally expensive as hell compared to simple algebraic math. Hell - differential equations are cheaper to run than simple: "does this line exist within this circle?" checks. That's why game physics has been slow to develop even when processors have increased exponentially in power.

Quote

I doubt it. I don't know of such a thing being in BT/MW lore for the time period PGI is representing currently.

Seismic sensing on the other hand, that's part of lore.

Sarcasm.

Not on mechs.

Quote

That's an opinion. Me and many people who think like me, have a different opinion. It's not 'stupidly OP' or 'OP' at all. It's available to everyone who has earned enough XP, GXP, and cash to purchase it.

No, it's pretty much the truth.

You gain a module that allows one to, effectively, see through walls. No tonnage requirement; no space requirement (aside from module spaces, but when your alternatives are consumables and things like pixelated "enhanced" zoom... it's not exactly a competition).

It offers a very potent advantage to experienced players (who, despite the best intention of ELO - are dropping alongside newer players) while being costly enough to exclude players with less than a few months under their belt.

Quote

And you try and council me on my reading comprehension? Reread what you quoted and tell me where I said you said it... I said, BY YOUR LOGIC... Your argument that because this particular feature isn't immediately available to someone who hasn't even played his first game yet, is a false argument, because this game is LOADED with crap that's not available until you've earned enough cash, XP, and GXP to purchase/activate it, something you well know. You just don't like the feature, and don't want to put forth the effort to learn new tactics to counter it, so you're grabbing at every hair brained argument to justify it's current nerfed to near nothingness state.

And you just happen to like the feature and will reach for any hair-brained argument to support its inclusion.

The point I was making was very clear. The combined factors of this module make it vastly overpowered. It's beyond a no-brainer module. If you want to be competitive - you must run it. It doesn't take up space or weight on your mech... yet it adds the ability to, essentially, defeat concealment and, to a lesser degree, concealment.

Quote

I don't give two ***** about what you pulled out of your butt, I asked about where in the BT/MW lore we have 'stealthed' 'mechs moving AT TOP SPEED with weapon charges at the ready. I too can make up as much neato-cheato enhancements to fit my wants for this game, too bad if it flies in the face of some 30 years of lore, and no, I'm not stating that game lore is sacrosanct either. There's enough 'compromises' in MWO already in the name 'game play' that that pipe dream has long been busted.

Yet you're trying to make the argument that I want to see features removed.

By the way - all of those ideas do come from a basis in lore. The Raven's original Electronic Warfare suite did create false signatures.

BAP has always been a bit of an enigma, technologically speaking. It doesn't really enhance sensor range - it just allows the detection of things within roughly 250 meters that any conscious human being should be able to see.

Quote

First off in this instance, we're talking about MWO features and their introduction in the development cycle of MWO. I seem to recall, and I may be misremembering here, that XL engines were introduced mid-way through closed beta, making them a new feature at the time. BAP was introduced around the same time as ECM as I recall, just before going open beta, if I remember the time line correctly, so at that time it was a new feature. If you've only been playing since open beta, then there's a lot you may not realize.

That's like saying LAMS or Endo-Composite structures are new features.

They are pre-existing concepts that are expected to be part of the game that were added.

I mean... LRMs. They were a pretty innovative and new feature....

Quote

And you're so intelligent you assume that I don't either? You certainly seem arrogant enough to believe that you do anyway...

I'm intelligent enough to know precisely how you will respond to everything I say.

I'm simply too stuborn to allow someone else to have the final word.

This 'discussion' is merely an exercise in vain.

Quote

You're so full of crap... Either you regularly use wall hacks and somehow have first hand experience, or, you're making one hell of an assumption. Facing an opponent using a wall hack, turning a corner, only to be headshot and have the same individual do it repeatedly, as opposed to facing an opponent who knows you're about to turn the corner, but not actually certain of your 'mech's build, height, speed, torso direction, et al, are light year's different, regardless of your supposed 'competency'.

You're focused on the "first contact" scenario.

It is no great feat of intelligence to discern that the Jenner that just ran behind the building is now that red dot that is moving behind the building on your map.

Or to figure out that the Atlas you were just knocking the hell out of is that red dot moving around to the other side of the building.

Quote

Of course if it's as easy as you say it is, then seismic is working based off that, and it makes sense then, because of course if it's easy to hear and distinguish as you're apparently implying, it's easy enough to have your 'mech's passive sensors do it too...

Acoustic sensors and seismic sensors are two different things. The nature of passive acoustics is a considerable degradation in event resolution. Distance and vector become very uncertain very quickly.

The exception to this is when using acoustics to plot the path of a ballistic round. With just a portion of the trail and a bit of its velocity, a ballistic computation will identify the source. But these aren't as good at pinpointing the origins of sounds - particularly low-frequency sounds with wavelengths in the meter range.

[Screech]

Viktor Drake, on 05 August 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Not sure if it was early in this post or not but I posted about how seismic works.

The stomp of the mech Siesmic is equiped on produces outward bound acustic waves. Let me reiterate a key word, OUTWARD. The waves flow away from the mech so the Seimisc sensor does not read those.

On the other hand all other mechs also produce outward flowing waves which would be seen as incoming waves to the Seismic equiped mech. These would reach the Seismic equiped mech and give distance and vector to epicenter.

This isn't made up by the way, this is how it works, just read up on seismic waves.

You would still have destructive interference of the inbound signals from the outbound signal due to both being carried by the same medium. I am sorry but soil is only half duplex not full.