Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
I think it fits, actually, because as your quote from the TRO:2750 mentioned, the Guardian does seem to interfere with Magscan, IR, etc ... but not to a sufficient degree to actually prevent detection and missile locks, which is ultimately the only thing that counts for the TT rules. That you cannot accurately identify a target is of little importance as long as you can shoot at it.
That being said, certainly an argument could be made about the specific type of 'Mech being a valuable tactical information. It's possible that the game simply does not consider this detail and files it away as abstraction, perhaps assuming that your pilots would simply attempt visual identification.
However, the TT rules also indicate that, when the sensor rules (part of the Double-Blind Rules found in TacOps) are actually in play, even basic sensors in the absence of any advanced equipment (that is, no Guardian, no Beagle, etc) still fail with disturbing regularity.
"To make a Sensor Check, the player rolls 2D6. A result of 7 or 8 means the sensor detects any unit within its short range. A result of 5 or 6 means the sensor detects units out to its medium range. A result of 2 to 4 means the sensor detects units out to its long range. A roll of 9 to 12 means the sensor failed to detect any units. Remember that a spotting unit may use only one type of sensor per turn, which is declared to the gamemaster at the start of the turn." - TacOps, pg. 222
The combined
2D6 probability of [9, 10, 11, or 12] is roughly 27.8% - meaning that
(on average) more than one-in-four sensor scans by a BattleMech's primary sensor arrays (even in an environment free of advanced EW packages) fail to detect any given target!
And again, there is the example scenario I cited previously, which does include Beagle and Guardian (and a Void-Sig System):
"Finally the gamemaster turns to the Beagle Active Probe. The ’Mechs in Hexes E, G and J were not revealed by the previous sensors. However, the ’Mech in Hex J has a hill hex in the LOS and so the probe is blocked. That leaves the units in Hexes H, I, E and G. The ’Mech in Hex H mounts the Void-Signature System, while the VTOL in Hex I mounts a standard Guardian ECM (the ’Mechs in Hexes E and G do not mount special equipment). Checking the original dice roll result, the gamemaster sees that a result of 2-3-4 occurred (the original result was a 3). For the units with the special equipment, he now applies those modifiers, as they work against a Beagle: a +6 and +4 modifier, respectively. For the ’Mech in Hex H, that changes the roll from 2-3-4 to 9-10-11, which means it cannot be detected (though the gamemaster would tell the player that an ECM system defeated the scan). For the VTOL in Hex I, the dice roll result is changed to 6-7-8, which actually moved the sensor detection into the short-range band (meaning the VTOL did not mask well enough), and so the VTOL in Hex I is revealed. Finally, the ’Mechs in hexes E and G both are in the short-range bracket for the Beagle Active Probe and so remain hidden." - TacOps, pg. 225
(Note that the example above uses the Line of Sight Diagram on pg. 100 of
Total Warfare as its reference for which unit is which & which unit is where relative to the others.)
In that particular case (where, it should be noted, the scanning unit had a host of other positive modifiers backing it up - including having a friendly Mobile HQ unit present, having friendly satellites overhead,
and being piloted by a Force Commander), the Guardian was unable to mask well enough at short range (or, alternatively, the Beagle was able to burn through the interference at short range) and would have actually failed even at long range (long range result of 8, versus needing a result of 9+ for the failure-to-detect condition).
However, Guardian carries a +5 modifier against basic sensors (versus the +4 modifier against Beagle) - the same 'Mech,
sans Beagle, in the same scenario would have completely failed to detect the VTOL in Hex I at long-range (as the Short/Medium/Long-range results would have been 7/8/9 rather than 6/7/8). Alternatively, the same 'Mech
with Beagle would have likewise failed to detect the VTOL at long range if the original sensor check roll had been 4 (or greater) rather than 3 (where the 2D6 probability of a 4 or greater is on the order of 91.6%).
However, it does show that Guardian (and the other ECM & stealth systems) can generate substantial modifiers against the primary sensor arrays (and even Beagle-enhanced sensors), such that it is possible to evade detection at long- and medium-ranges (and even at short ranges, if one is lucky) via use of that equipment.
This also does not contradict the statement from TRO:2750 - "enemy long-range sensors can find vehicles and 'Mechs within the curtain"... however, "
can find" is not always the same thing as "
will find".
That, then, brings us back to "if the sensors fail to find a target, how does the targeting system - which depends on data gathered by those same sensors - establish a lock against a target that it 'cannot see'?"
IMO, it would seem that PGI's response to that question (perhaps influenced by the relatively-high likelihood of a failure-to-detect condition at long- and medium-ranges in TT?) has been, "it doesn't".
Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
Thanks for pointing me towards that TRO, by the way - it certainly helps to better understand the Guardian suite.
From what I can see, this actually fits perfectly to what I suggested earlier ... that you can achieve missile lock, but that the ECM would prevent you from getting a correct "paperdoll" readout of your target.
On a sidenote, there does seem to be a lot of metal on a 'Mech, actually. As per the TechManual, the frame itself is constructed from foamed aluminium surrounded by titanium-alloyed steel, and the outer armour layer is made from a hardened iron alloy.
Not to mention that the bulk of the mass of a Fusion Engine comes from its shielding, composed of "tungsten-carbide, which is reinforced with short ceramic fibers mixed into the carbide" for Standard Engines and which is "[slimmed] down... and [reinforced]... with a crystalline plastic similar to those of double strength heat sinks".
That whole section of
TechManual is such a fun read, yes?
Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
wtb Inferno SRMs for my Jenner
It's a preferred tactic of the DCMS!
So,
burninating the countrysides and all the peoples is (still) a preferred tactic of the DCMS, is it?
**imagines flocks of Inferno-armed
Jenners running about with
Dalek-esque exclamations of "BURN-IN-ATE! BURN-IN-ATE!"
Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
Someone ought to
update the wiki, then. Is it possible that BAP once did this and it was just patched out again? I know Beagle went through several changes, maybe that was "just a phase". Or the SSRM bit is unintended and thus a bug. Or ... this is all just an urban rumour.
It is my understanding that the SSRM issue with Beagle was/is(?) an unintended bug, and one that does not affect standard missiles.
Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
Yes, I was all like chikusho! when I read that 'Mech's loadout. That being said, with lasers being hitscan weapons, and Clan weaponry apparently also being planned to cause greater heat, it seems that this loadout will be a one-trick-pony capable of dealing a lot of pain, but then taking a lot of time to cool down again. I suppose it comes down to a matter of "approach and evade".
All I can say is that these 'Mechs will likely require a special way of dealing with them - but then again, we already have some of those with the more exotic IS-loadouts like the Splatcat.
Also, I'll always support more cockpit customization.
Yeah...
it turns out that if the (C)ERML is heat-scaling-linked to the standard MLas (in the same way that the ERLL and standard LLas are linked), firing all of a
Black Hawk Prime's CERMLs at once could/would generate something to the tune of 210 units of heat (including "ghost heat").
If that is ultimately the case, I expect many a
Black Hawk to die quickly and hilariously via overheating shortly after release.
Kyone Akashi, on 26 December 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:
As much as some Clan players have suggested this, I never imagined that to work in an online game anyways. The vast majority of gamers will (unfortunately) always be focused on victory first and foremost, with things like honour codes being a secondary concern, at best being thrown out of the window the moment defeat seems imminent.
Quite a few of us Spheroids have suggested it as well, and several (
including myself) have put forward methods for implementing at least some parts of it as elements of the game.
Unfortunately, a lot of Zell actually depends on intent (which the computers cannot be trusted to judge accurately), and PGI evidently (IMO) decided that no Zell at all (on their part... which says nothing about whether some player-run Clan units enforce some version of Zell within their own ranks) was preferable (or, at least easier) than enforcing some parts but not others.