101 replies to this topic

[Krivvan]

Ghogiel, on 05 October 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

It's not a graphical glitch in the strict sense. It's temporarily loses the lock so you can't keep shooting SSRMs etc when you aren't looking at them unless you have 360 targeting.

The way I've always used them was that the second you lose the lock, it's gone until you put the reticule over the targeted mech and get it again. The UI makes it look like you have your reticule on the mech and are reacquiring a lock.

[VXJaeger]

General Taskeen, on 05 October 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

Its been like since Closed Beta with what you described. And ja, Streaks are easy mode - at least compared to any other Mech Warrior game in existence.

As long as Spider and Jenner are best assault mechs in game, I don't give a flying **** them being "easymode". I fill my KTO-18 with Streaks and go bughunting.

[Spheroid]

Krivvan, on 05 October 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

I understand if it's a glitch and it's just that the target lock was never lost in the first place, but why should it have locked just because it was in the field of view? That's not how LRMs and SSRMs work.

That is how both missile systems work. The targeting code is shared between the two weapons. If that were not the case it would be impossible to reacquire LRM tracking on a target. The target was missile locked, briefly went out of view then reappeared. If you restarted missle lock time everytime a target came back into view you totally destroy LRMs. I like that reacquisition lock is much shorter than full lock.

[Wispsy]

Spheroid, on 05 October 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

The target is in your field of view two seconds into the video. There is no mystery. If you can see it you can lock it.

Imagine if he had 360 retention...Then the target would be targeted and target-able...the lock on should only happen when you aim at it (and I use the term loosely).

[Krivvan]

Spheroid, on 05 October 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

That is how both missile systems work. The targeting code is shared between the two weapons. If that were not the case it would be impossible to reacquire LRM tracking on a target. The target was missile locked, briefly went out of view then reappeared. If you restarted missle lock time everytime a target came back into view you totally destroy LRMs. I like that reacquisition lock is much shorter than full lock.

But the reacquisition lock, although shorter, still requires you to have the reticule above the target does it not?

Because otherwise apparently my aim is so good that I have not noticed this in a year of on and off playing of streak mechs.

[Wispsy]

Spheroid, on 05 October 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

That is how both missile systems work. The targeting code is shared between the two weapons. If that were not the case it would be impossible to reacquire LRM tracking on a target. The target was missile locked, briefly went out of view then reappeared. If you restarted missle lock time everytime a target came back into view you totally destroy LRMs. I like that reacquisition lock is much shorter than full lock.

The time was not in question. That is how quickly you gain a lock from Artemis SSRMs....the fact that it locked on at all was the problem...

[Spheroid]

Wispsy, on 05 October 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Imagine if he had 360 retention...Then the target would be targeted and target-able...the lock on should only happen when you aim at it (and I use the term loosely).

360 only affects target lock not missile lock. He claims he uses neither 360 nor target decay. If that centurion was also being targeted by a friendly that would be just as valid as 360 for maintaining the target for the missile lock to reacquire.

[IronChance]

It doesn't look like lock was ever lost, but the vid is too short to tell. You can look away and back within a few seconds and the lock isn't lost and you don't have to go through normal tone lock to reacquire.

[PEEFsmash]

IronChance, on 05 October 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

It doesn't look like lock was ever lost, but the vid is too short to tell. You can look away and back within a few seconds and the lock isn't lost and you don't have to go through normal tone lock to reacquire.

So in order to reaquire all I have to do is have them in my field of view? I don't actually have to put my reticle on top of them?

So what I should do is get streak lock once, then after that point, I have no real reason to look at them if I only want to shoot streaks, I should just put them into the corner of my FOV and shoot my autohit missiles while facing perpendicularly from them, only able to see a tiny piece of their mech? And you think this is the way it should be?

Edited by PEEFsmash, 05 October 2013 - 11:08 AM.

[Ghogiel]

Krivvan, on 05 October 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

The way I've always used them was that the second you lose the lock, it's gone until you put the reticule over the targeted mech and get it again.

Yeah. But in this case he probably didn't lose lock. He still had it, all that happened is that he lost targeting. Once he regained target, all that UI business kicked back in, the lock timer was still going, and did the lock initialization sequence as well> turning reticule to the red lock instead of it just being red.

Quote

The UI makes it look like you have your reticule on the mech and are reacquiring a lock.

I guess they could make it do something else.

[Krivvan]

I just checked in testing grounds. You're right. Streak lock is re-engaged whenever you re-target a mech and it's in your FOV. Streak lock also never breaks as long as the target is in the FOV.

But I looked back at some of my old videos and this was not the case. Which patch was it that it was added in?

At 1:23 you can see that my streak lock breaks when my reticule is off the target and it's still in my FOV.

[Wispsy]

OK nvm I give up no more looking at these forums today :/

Edited by Wispsy, 05 October 2013 - 11:10 AM.

[dario03]

Wispsy, on 05 October 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

The time was not in question. That is how quickly you gain a lock from Artemis SSRMs....the fact that it locked on at all was the problem...

Which reminds me. Why the heck does artemis still give a benefit and no downsides to ssrms?

[Adiuvo]

dario03, on 05 October 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

Which reminds me. Why the heck does artemis still give a benefit and no downsides to ssrms?

It's a consequence of them using the same lock on system for SRMs and LRMs. I'd imagine it's a low-priority known bug at this point.

[Krivvan]

Same lack of reacquisition a year ago.

Same thing half a year ago.

[Sephlock]

Wispsy, on 05 October 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

OK nvm I give up no more looking at these forums today :/

Your side's victory is inevitable anyway. PGI always sides with the "make things weaker" crowd sooner or later.

[Ghogiel]

Krivvan, on 05 October 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

I just checked in testing grounds. You're right. Streak lock is re-engaged whenever you re-target a mech and it's in your FOV. Streak lock also never breaks as long as the target is in the FOV.

But I looked back at some of my old videos and this was not the case. Which patch was it that it was added in?

At 1:23 you can see that my streak lock breaks when my reticule is off the target and it's still in my FOV.

Eww. It never did this before. And yeah you are supposed to, at least used to have to hit the reticule on the actual geometry of the mech, not just get it in the red box to reset the lock timer.

[Krivvan]

And again, 4 months ago it still didn't reacquire/keep lock upon having the enemy targeted and in view.

Compare to how it works now.

Edited by Krivvan, 05 October 2013 - 11:28 AM.

[dario03]

Adiuvo, on 05 October 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

It's a consequence of them using the same lock on system for SRMs and LRMs. I'd imagine it's a low-priority known bug at this point.

Oh I know why it works like it does. I was more so commenting on why haven't they changed that yet. I imagine the low priority point is why but really can't they just add some kind of code that just stops artemis affects on ssrm. I don't know codeing but that wouldn't be hard would it? I would think not at least for mechs that have ssrm but no lrm equipped. Or just make it add weight/crit so its not a pay for straight up upgrade.

[Krivvan]

dario03, on 05 October 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:

I don't know codeing but that wouldn't be hard would it?

You usually can never know whether something would or wouldn't be hard until you know exactly how it was programmed. It could be something so engrained in the system that it would require an overhaul. Or it could just be a single value that needs to be flipped.