25 replies to this topic

[Alex Wolfe]

Willpower, on 04 August 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

Ridiculous.
An M1A2 Abrams tank requires nothing of the sort for firing weapons at much longer ranges than what we are discussing here. You target where you want the round to hit, and the electronic targeting system elevates the barrel to the exact degree required to hit the target.

Why would this not be true for some ballistic weapon a thousand years in the future?

More ridiculous than "why isn't fighting done with unmanned flying remote control/AI drones in the future"? Or less? They are using those now after all...

The answer is "for fun". BT isn't supposed to be accurate representation of "the future" with relation to the "current" warfare. Giant robots genre is ridiculous by its nature.

[Nonoka]

Bullington, on 03 August 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

Are you kidding. Why not just smash the whole HUD. Do you put duct tape over your speedometer in the car?

No, but after driving for 30 years I don't need it. I can guess withing a couple MPH how fast I'm going. Do you wait for the Check Oil light to, ya know, check your oil?
They call those "***** Lights" for a reason. Nothing beats knowing your machine and it's capabilities.

[SOG66]

C'mon if the cockpit shows how far the target is and the weapons have a known effective range, why wouldn't there be a indicator?

[Feffle]

Nonoka, on 04 August 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

No, but after driving for 30 years I don't need it. I can guess withing a couple MPH how fast I'm going. Do you wait for the Check Oil light to, ya know, check your oil?
They call those "***** Lights" for a reason. Nothing beats knowing your machine and it's capabilities.

But what about those learning to drive? Do you really want to make it hard on them?

[Blue Footed Booby]

Willpower, on 04 August 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

Ridiculous.
An M1A2 Abrams tank requires nothing of the sort for firing weapons at much longer ranges than what we are discussing here. You target where you want the round to hit, and the electronic targeting system elevates the barrel to the exact degree required to hit the target.

Why would this not be true for some ballistic weapon a thousand years in the future?

Because this is a videogame and not real life? If you like hyper realism that's great, there are games for you (though I'll be first to agree not enough), but I don't understand why you think this game about giant stompy robots is going to be/should be one of them. None of the Battletech games, computer or table top, have ever had any pretense of being that kind of "hard" sci fi. It seems pretty obvious to me that the devs are using drop first and foremost as a means of balancing, with realism being just a convenient side benefit.

That said, I'd love to play some kind of sci fi shooter (that isn't terrible or made by Dice) that went for Arma levels of realism and attention to detail, or beyond--things like degradation of individual plates in suits of power armor, fires burning with spherical flames in zero gravity, and effective range of laser weapons varying with atmospheric conditions.

Edited by Blue Footed Booby, 04 August 2012 - 07:50 PM.

[Chihuahua]

ehm either i just haven't discovered it yet but there is no min/max effect information in the mechlab. neither i can see how much rounds of ammo i buy if i purchase a ton.

if i can look it up before in the mechlab i'm fine with it. would be much easier to configure a close mid or long range mech even without knowing the battletech universe matter.

still it's quit unrealistic having cold fusion reactors and a targeting system not telling you if you're good to hit or not.

Edited by Chihuahua, 15 August 2012 - 06:19 AM.