132 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

Khobai, on 04 March 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

but in general a light mech should have better sensors than an assault. for the exceptions there are quirks, so the atlas-d-dc could get a sensor range quirk. but most other assaults should have fairly weak sensors.

one of the main reason why scouting isnt an actual role in MWO is because heavies are nearly as good at scouting as lights are. they have the SAME detection ranges. that is fundamentally wrong for game balance. lights should have better base detection than heavies.

That is not true.

A 'Mech designed & built to fill a reconnaissance or surveying role should have above-average sensor capability and or be fitted with advanced add-on sensor suites, regardless of its tonnage or weight class.

While Light 'Mechs are often to fill the recon role, this is not their exclusive purview - there are a number of Medium-class "Scout 'Mechs" (such as the Assassin, Cicada, and Night Stalker), a few Heavy-class Scout 'Mechs (such as the Scourge and, arguably, the Loki Prime), and even Assault-class recon-oriented 'Mechs (the most notable example being the CGR-1A1 Charger).

Likewise, there are Light 'Mechs that are NOT particularly outfitted for the reconnaissance role, and are instead designed to fill more-directly combat-oriented roles like skirmishers and strikers - examples include the Valiant, most variants of the Jenner, certain variants of the Commando, the Hollander (a Light-class dedicated sniper), the Pack Hunter (another dedicated Light-class sniper), the Uller/Kit Fox, and the Puma/Adder.
Such 'Mechs would not be as sensor-heavy as their recon-oriented brethren & would have no reason to have the same sensor-oriented bonuses, so they would have the same baseline sensors as non-recon 'Mechs of other weight classes.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 04 March 2015 - 06:00 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Improved sensors should either be inherent to the specific chassis and/or with additional sensor packages/upgrades that require slots and/or tonnage to install.

[Strum Wealh]

CocoaJin, on 04 March 2015 - 06:42 PM, said:

Improved sensors should either be inherent to the specific chassis and/or with additional sensor packages/upgrades that require slots and/or tonnage to install.

It should go a step further, and be inherent to certain variants rather than necessarily chassis-wide (such that certain variants within a chassis might have it, while other variants within the same chassis might not).
Or, make it something that takes up module slots rather than crits & tonnage, as that would be a better fit for mirroring the nature of Design Quirks as presented in StratOps.

[Gattsus]

About a year ago, someone proposed the same, a tonnage based detection range, i.e. that mechs would be detected/locked on based on their tonnage.

I think Russ or someone from PGI thought it was a great idea, and the community agreed, but I think they forgot about it. It would be great for role warfare.

Someone, find that post!

Edited by Gattsus, 04 March 2015 - 07:04 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Strum Wealh, on 04 March 2015 - 07:01 PM, said:

It should go a step further, and be inherent to certain variants rather than necessarily chassis-wide (such that certain variants within a chassis might have it, while other variants within the same chassis might not).
Or, make it something that takes up module slots rather than crits & tonnage, as that would be a better fit for mirroring the nature of Design Quirks as presented in StratOps.

Correct, it should be variant specific.

[CocoaJin]

Strum Wealh, on 04 March 2015 - 07:01 PM, said:

It should go a step further, and be inherent to certain variants rather than necessarily chassis-wide (such that certain variants within a chassis might have it, while other variants within the same chassis might not).
Or, make it something that takes up module slots rather than crits & tonnage, as that would be a better fit for mirroring the nature of Design Quirks as presented in StratOps.

I'm not a big fan of free bonuses. Mech skills, Quirks and Modules are enough in my opinion, additional improvements need to come at some cost...we have to get the power creep in check.

[MauttyKoray]

I personally think that target detection range should actually be REDUCE somewhere between 100-200m. We have so many BOOSTS to it that you can get pinged as a friggin dot on the screen at this point.

I also dislike the DOUBLE zoom being an inherent part of the mech...once maybe, but only certain mechs/certain pieces of equipment getting the double zoom would be far better IMO, maybe even make it the module and just have advanced zoom get 2 levels. The first level being our current 'second' zoom and the second being the current Advanced Zoom module's level. It could function by disabling the 'second' standard zoom without the module and then enabling it with, then enabling the current advanced zoom with a second level for the module and the same current control functions; or turn the advanced zoom into a zoom change function like the current zoom and make it have 2 levels (first available with the Lvl 1 Advanced Zoom and the second with Lvl 2).

[Dino Might]

Kristov Kerensky, on 04 March 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

Can we get off the RADAR please, Mech sensors are a lot more than just reflected radio waves after all. They taste the air, they sense vibrations in the air and ground, magscan, thermal, uv, links to orbiting vehicles/sats, the list goes on, it's covered in the fluff, lore and novels, it's a complicated system composed of many things, and unless you can blanket them all, you aren't doing much to hide your Mech.

...

Sensor range by Mech size is silly...

As for being able to sneak around, well, if I can get my King Crab around the enemy on Caustic and surprise them with dual AC20s at 50m into their backs, I THINK some of the Lights ought to be able to do the same. If they can't, they just aren't trying very hard.

We're not specifically on RADAR. Most, if not all sensors discussed in the lore will be impacted by size/tonnage. Maybe some more significantly than others, but try to name a few for which a small mech would have no difference in ease of detection vs a big mech.

- MAD - larger mech has more magnetic material, easier to detect
- RADAR - discussed ad nauseum, bigger mech easier to spot
- Environmental (particulate) "sniffers" - light mech has smaller chemical emissions, kicks up less dust, etc.
- Neutrino - good luck getting this on a mech, but even then, lighter mechs use smaller engines, lower power rating, fewer neutrinos
- Acoustic/Seismic - lighter mech, lower amplitude, higher frequency, shorter propagation of shock/vibration waves (including sound waves).
- LIDAR / motion sensors - need visual input, smaller mechs have smaller visual profile. Speed does matter here, too, but if that's equal, then smaller mech is more difficult to detect with this (incorporate a speed impact as an additional factor)

I can't think of any other sensor types at the moment, but please find me one where size/weight won't have an impact.


I totally agree that sensor range based on mech size is silly. I don't want blanket sensor buffs to lights or nerfs to assaults. I think standard sensors should have the same performance on all mechs; however, while detection modifiers apply based on mech characteristics, so those should apply to sensor performance to affect the base performance given to each mech (which can be used as a form of balancing).

Being able to sneak up on an enemy team once in a King Crab proves nothing. Also, establishing game mechanics and balance on a handful of outliers is usually not the most effective way to do it.

[Strum Wealh]

Dino Might, on 04 March 2015 - 10:33 PM, said:

We're not specifically on RADAR. Most, if not all sensors discussed in the lore will be impacted by size/tonnage. Maybe some more significantly than others, but try to name a few for which a small mech would have no difference in ease of detection vs a big mech.

- MAD - larger mech has more magnetic material, easier to detect
- RADAR - discussed ad nauseum, bigger mech easier to spot
- Environmental (particulate) "sniffers" - light mech has smaller chemical emissions, kicks up less dust, etc.
- Neutrino - good luck getting this on a mech, but even then, lighter mechs use smaller engines, lower power rating, fewer neutrinos
- Acoustic/Seismic - lighter mech, lower amplitude, higher frequency, shorter propagation of shock/vibration waves (including sound waves).
- LIDAR / motion sensors - need visual input, smaller mechs have smaller visual profile. Speed does matter here, too, but if that's equal, then smaller mech is more difficult to detect with this (incorporate a speed impact as an additional factor)

I can't think of any other sensor types at the moment, but please find me one where size/weight won't have an impact.

As previously pointed out, radar cross section ("RCS") is generally independent of a vehicle's physical size; it is affected far more strongly by the geometry/shape of the vehicle & the materials used in said vehicle's construction.

Quote

As we already know that standard & Ferro-Fiberous 'Mech armors are not radar-absorbent to any significant degree (since we already know what it's made of, and because radar-absorbancy is the purview of Stealth Armor), the materials aspect is a non-issue.

That leaves the geometry aspect... and in that aspect, most BattleMechs would not fare all that well.
Consider, for example, the humble Commando:


Notice the large number of broad, (generally) flat, (generally) vertical, (mostly) ferrous surfaces - all of those would be excellent reflectors of radio energy (e.g. "radar waves"), which would give the the Commando a very large RCS.

By contrast, a 'Mech that featured far more angular surfaces (see the F-117 and its predecessor, the "Hopeless Diamond") or far more rounded surfaces (see the B-2) would have a smaller RCS, even if it were substantially larger than the Commando.
To illustrate the point, here are the RCSs of several different aircraft:

Notice how, for example, the B-1 has a smaller RCS than all of the (much smaller) fighter aircraft above it, and how the MIG-29 has a slightly smaller RCS than the significantly-physically-smaller MIG-21 & only half the RCS than the only-slightly-larger F-4.

Lidar & sonar work in much the same way (using IR/visible/UV light & sound, respectively); how much energy gets reflected back to the sensor's receiver is much more strongly affected by the shape of the vehicle and the materials used in its outer surfaces, while the vehicle's physical size has very little (if any) effect.

Thermography ("heat vision") is also generally independent of physical size; a smaller vehicle putting out a large amount of IR energy in the direction of the sensor would be just as detectable at the same range as a larger vehicle outing out the same amount of IR energy at the same range.

For all of the above: as long as the target vehicle is within the sensor's detection range AND the sensor has LOS to the target AND the sensor operator is paying attention, the physical size of the target vehicle means rather little in comparison to certain other factors.

The AN/ASD-5 "Pave Mace"/"Black Crow" magnetic anomaly detection system is well-known for being able to detect the activation of a truck engine's ignition coils from altitude when mounted in an AC-130 gunship aircraft during the Vietnam War (see here and here); aside from detecting the multiple tons of ferrous (and, thus, ferromagnetic) material that make up any 'Mech, the magnetic field produced by a 'Mech's Fusion Engine would be easily detected by such a sensor.

Even chemical sensors would likely NOT be affected by a 'Mech's size. BattleMechs are fusion-powered (and have no exhaust pipes/plumes, like ICE-powered vehicles), and their environmental systems are closed & airtight (so even a rather ripe MechWarrior wouldn't give it away). However, BattleMechs are rather hot piles of metal and plastic, and those do give off certain chemical emissions (as anyone who knows the "hot/burning metal", "hot/burning plastic", and various oil/lubricant smells can attest).

Edited by Strum Wealh, 05 March 2015 - 07:33 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

That is not true.

Yes. Its true. Light mechs in general should have better detection than heavy/assault mechs.

Quote

Likewise, there are Light 'Mechs that are NOT particularly outfitted for the reconnaissance role,

Battletech is NOT MWO. You seem to have the two confused. All lights in MWO need to be able to scout to be useful to their team. Because thats all lights can do that other weight classes cant do better.

In MWO, Thered be absolutely no reason to use a light mech thats bad at scouting when you could use a light mech thats good at scouting instead. All light mechs have to be at least somewhat good at scouting to prevent them from being completely obsolete. All your idea would accomplish is creating an elite subset of light mechs that everyone uses while the rest of the light mechs face into obscurity.

For example, why would anyone use a commando 2D, if the raven 3L is a much better scout? The commando 2D would simply become obsolete. However if the commando 2D was just as capable of scouting... thered at least be some motivation to use it to save 10 tons in your drop deck.

Edited by Khobai, 05 March 2015 - 07:10 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Thank you Strum, saved me from writing that up

Khobai, no, pure and simple, no. NOT all Light Mechs are recon, we've got Panthers and Adders in MWO, neither are recon Mechs, they are killers, designed to harass larger Mechs and kill Lights/Mediums. We don't see the recon specific Mechs being used FOR that purpose in MWO already, they are used harassers and killers despite having tools to make them good recon Mechs. Giving them extended sensors and NOT showing up until they are top of the enemy as well? That's not balance, that very unbalanced, you can already SEE that in MWO with ECM Lights who go out and take out Assaults because they aren't picked up by sensors currently.

Dino Might, that's not a one off with my King Crab, I do it often, comes from playing Lights as well as Assaults and learning how to stay hidden, it's not hard to do. I also do it with Battlemasters, Banshees, Stalkers, Centurions, etc, any Mech can do it, you just have to actually TRY not to get spotted by using the terrain, not run around in the wide open and think you are invisible, as so many 'Scouts' do currently. Hell, we were sneaking around in our Atlases before ECM all the time, can't count how many times we'd cap a base without ever firing a shot in our Assaults.

Sensors in MWO are LoS within X range, which can be amped up, except for Seismic. Pretty much how they work in BTech TT, if you can see it, you can usually target it. You can target indirectly IF someone else has a LoS on the target, just like TT. I'd love to get the full suite of sensors from lore, but that's not going to happen, nor does it need to. I'd be happy to just get passive/active working like the previous MW titles.

[Dino Might]

Strum Wealh, on 05 March 2015 - 04:06 AM, said:

For all of the above: as long as the target vehicle is within the sensor's detection range AND the sensor has LOS to the target AND the sensor operator is paying attention, the physical size of the target vehicle means rather little in comparison to certain other factors.

These are assumptions that size will impact. I understand the factors involved, and my point is that size does matter. Not quite as much for certain detection systems, but my point is that it should be factored in. You can't brush it away as negligible. If I took reflectors (orthogonal plates) of various sizes, the bigger ones would be easier to detect with RADAR, LIDAR, etc. I think you are arguing how we have to pick and choose what factors are the most impacting and model those, and throw away the others. I am arguing that there is no way we are going to model the reflectivity of all the different mech geometries, so we have to (inaccurately) assume parity for all cross sectional attributes not associated with size, and then scale that base cross section on size.

You guys are assuming equivalence on all aspects of detection to be independent of size, but for instance, thermography...
If you assume heat output of an Atlas and a Locust while stationary, not firing weapons. The Atlas will stick out much more than the Locust. Why? Bigger mech requires more power for its systems, requires more energy generated from the fusion reactor, which creates more waste heat that is radiated to the environment. It's simple thermodynamics that a bigger power source will dump more waste heat. Now, I agree that the thermal sensors only care about heat energy and not size of the target, but I am saying (as with all my previous posts) that size will generally correlate with the attributes that factor into detectability for these various sensors.

I totally agree with what you are saying in terms of what factors affect sensor ability to detect a target. But then you assume that size has no correlation with those factors, which is bogus.

Do I think that a Locust at 90% heat scale should be more easily detected than an Atlas at 3%? YES! But a Locust and Atlas both at 3% should not have the same thermal detection profile. That is what I am getting at. The 3% heat scale for a Locust is a different amount of absolute exhaust heat than the 3% for an Atlas.

Edited by Dino Might, 05 March 2015 - 10:07 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Mercules, on 04 March 2015 - 06:09 AM, said:

Shame, as I stated it improves the game. Without Double Blind rules you can't set up "ambushes" or really flanking maneuvers. It's basically "Pray for initiative and calculate how to get a better to hit number on your target than your opponent will have trying to hit you." With Double Blind I spend a lot of time thinking, planning, and maneuvering. Without it I spend a lot of time doing math and calculating odds.

That's a matter of opinion.

There are those of us that prefer to play a game that doesn't require 30 minutes per round of battle, and those who are just 'purists' and enjoy the game as it was originally released.

Quote

It wasn't WhizKids... they about ruined the game and made a "clickbase" farce of it.

I agree it was a stupid idea, but they were looking to sell merchandise. Not everyone needs to/is willing to buy rule books and modules in a paper based game, BUT, make it a REQUIREMENT to buy a plastic doo-dad to in order to participate, you have increased your income potential.

But, agreed, that was dumb.

Quote

3rd Person Perspective is not a skill... it should not exist in Mechwarrior. Nor does it allow for target locks that gather actual information such as condition of mechs. You can do 3PP one better by target locking and dodging and actually getting readouts and holding locks but you have to alert the enemy you are there and that is not really "scouting". Notice in the lore most reconnaissance and "scout" mechs have sensor systems said to be enhanced, excellent, improved, advanced, and such terms. That means they actually find mechs with sensors, aka lock on.

I disagree, there's a LOT of things we SHOULD have actually, to have a 'MechWarrior experience consistent with the lore. 360 degree viewing, MAD sensing, live tactical overlays, I find the 3rd person view another aspect of MWO that is a compromise in that direction. Knowing HOW to use it, without giving away position takes practice, there is some skill. How much? I dunno, but the best scouts I know DO use it, and often, and those people that aren't skilled, never, ever do.

Quote

Again, 3PP is not a "skill" it is a legal wall hack put in because IGP insisted the game appeal to the "masses".

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree, but mainly, that you're wrong.

Quote

Voice Coms have helped out, but all you can do with the scouting you described is give people a rough idea of troop movement, not what weaponry they have. It's important to know that the Jagger is carrying 2 AC20s so that your team takes it out at range and doesn't get ambushed close in. It's good to know if that Hunchback is a 4G or 4P which you can't always make out from the side or behind without a lock.

So I'm not sure how making it harder for the scout to detect/lock on to the Jaeger you described, than it is to detect the Atlas standing right next to it at the same distance does that...

Quote

In order to gather information from the enemy I have to expose myself enough to get locks and thus be locked in turn, or use ECM which is much better served covering the team so that some OTHER scout can't gather info on them and will be vulnerable in return as we can lock them.

Unless you're behind the enemy, in which case you could be in broad daylight and they wouldn't know you were there (hence the need for 360 degree viewing at mentioned before). Of course properly utilizing 3rd person view allows you to see the enemy and not be "quite" so detectable too, but again, you have to know to use it.

Quote

With the size of the maps, someone in the center of the smaller ones can basically lock a light on the outer edges and that alerts the whole team quickly and easily. With this a light might be able to break off from the team without lowering his team's effectiveness. As it is he is better adding to the deathball and possibly providing ECM escort. Why play a fast and maneuverable mech that can be one shot if you are tied to some plodding monster that is going 64kph? Why not just play something that goes 70-80 KPH but has more firepower?

IF the light exposes himself, and IF doesn't get to cover and move to a new position when he hears the targeting 'chirp' when the enemy targets him, then yeah, it's easy.

Again, skilled scouts know these things.

PLUS, it's actually a viable strategy to have a light expose himself to draw off some of the enemy team in a 'squirrel chase'. Many is the time I've had to step in personally to end a dang 'squirrel chase' before half the team was led off too destruction.

Quote

The speed of the lights is for flanking, maneuvering, and scouting. When the enemy can spot you instantly from any reasonable range because of a sensor contact a lot of that becomes a lot less viable.

If your light is unskilled, true.

Trust me, skilled light pilots/scouts only find it a minor inconvenience at most, and the best actually count on it working the way it currently does for reasons mentioned previously.

[KraftySOT]

Gattsus, on 04 March 2015 - 07:02 PM, said:

About a year ago, someone proposed the same, a tonnage based detection range, i.e. that mechs would be detected/locked on based on their tonnage.

I think Russ or someone from PGI thought it was a great idea, and the community agreed, but I think they forgot about it. It would be great for role warfare.

Someone, find that post!

No they looked into it and it was beyond their abilities.

Theres a huge problem with their targeting/LOS/indirect code, and they cant tackle it. Not much will change here for quite some time.

Though a new release of their leased engine...might fix this problem too. So theres hope.

[Vandul]

The real question is, why does one Radar Derp module work for all mechs?

[Dimento Graven]

Vandul, on 05 March 2015 - 10:35 AM, said:

The real question is, why does one Radar Derp module work for all mechs?

Now that you mention it, Radar Derp is THE MOST 'Mech-voodoo module in the game isn't it?

[KraftySOT]

Without it however this game would be terrible. Radar derp and Magic Jesus Box are the only things holding this ship together.

[Kristov Kerensky]

KraftySOT, on 05 March 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

Without it however this game would be terrible. Radar derp and Magic Jesus Box are the only things holding this ship together.

That's not true, I run a number of my Mechs without Radar Dep or ECM, they do just fine when I play smart instead of just charging in blindly, even in the LRM prone public ques, AMS and using cover works wonders without those things on my Mechs. I've yet to die to LRMs without it being directly my own stupidty that caused it. I run some LRM support builds and smart players drive me nuts, I can't hurt them with missiles despite them not having ECM or running Radar Dep(time to lose target gives that away).

Passive and active sensor modes would do a world of good and change up how the game plays in a number of ways. Then again, we'd probably only see that in the higher levels of play, most players don't even know what R is still, what are the odds they'd understand passive/active sensor modes

[Dimento Graven]

Kristov Kerensky, on 05 March 2015 - 11:18 AM, said:

That's not true, I run a number of my Mechs without Radar Dep or ECM, they do just fine when I play smart instead of just charging in blindly, even in the LRM prone public ques, AMS and using cover works wonders without those things on my Mechs. I've yet to die to LRMs without it being directly my own stupidty that caused it. I run some LRM support builds and smart players drive me nuts, I can't hurt them with missiles despite them not having ECM or running Radar Dep(time to lose target gives that away).

Passive and active sensor modes would do a world of good and change up how the game plays in a number of ways. Then again, we'd probably only see that in the higher levels of play, most players don't even know what R is still, what are the odds they'd understand passive/active sensor modes

Agreed.

[Mercules]

Dimento Graven, on 05 March 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Trust me, skilled light pilots/scouts only find it a minor inconvenience at most, and the best actually count on it working the way it currently does for reasons mentioned previously.

This is really bordering on:



I mean skill does come into play and you did define what you consider skill. I've used 3rd person myself to report movements but the majority of the players when polled had overwhelmingly voted against it's inclusion.... for a reason. If ECM didn't give entire companies of mechs sensor invisibility it would be a useful tool for scouting but then again most "scout" mechs never carried ECM instead they carried slightly better sensor suites. This would be enhanced sensors and that would be fine, if the maps were a bit bigger so the extra range actually mattered.

If you think about it from a game perspective most people would still run something like Radar Dep. but an LRM mech might actually want Enhanced Sensors so that he could target smaller mechs further away on his own and not have to rely on other's locks. If they made Enchance Sensors a flat 200 extra meters even against a 20 tonner they would have more than 800m detection range.

So Scouts would still need to be cagey but it would give them a bit more leeway and give another module an actual use.