169 replies to this topic

[Gas Guzzler]

If you make PPCs fast again then everyone will use them and ECM will get shut down all the time

[Quxudica]

Strum Wealh, on 17 April 2015 - 12:26 PM, said:

Both of the above statements is false.

"BattleMechs are also not islands unto themselves. They can share sensor data to some extent, allowing greater sensory performance than a single ’Mech can achieve. The specialized equipment of a C3 system takes this to new heights with direct battlefield applications, but all BattleMechs can at least receive basic sensory data from a unit mate." - TechManual, page 39

"As much a revolution in battlefield technology as one of combat philosophy for its creators in the Draconis Combine, the system is essentially an elaborate tight-beam communications suite, designed to link the sensors and targeting systems of up to a full lance of friendly units in a single, closed network. The C3 system enables those within its network to draw targeting data from one another and coordinate fire with amazing ease. As long as effective weapon ranges and lines of fire permit, a member of a C3 network can essentially strike at a target with the same accuracy as the nearest friendly network member." - TechManual, page 209

C3 systems are simply a means for sharing more and better information (including, specifically, targeting and tracking information) with the other members of the same C3 network, but all 'Mechs canonically have the ability to share at least basic information with an allied unit - and it is this universal capability which is what's implemented in MWO currently.

We can argue minutia all day, but I think it's reasonable to say that MWO's version of radar is extremely simplistic and not what is supposed to be available with zero extra equipment. Further I don't think it's at all a stretch to think it's an area of the game that is a missed opportunity for more interesting game mechanics.

[bad arcade kitty]

yeah, better buff ppc, but don't nerf ecm

[Mawai]

Sjorpha, on 17 April 2015 - 02:38 AM, said:

Completely disagree, targeting mechs is super easy now. Too easy. Should be harder, the radar should be less reliable in some environments with interference and false positives and such.

Maybe ECM should prevent targeting using R but not interfere with the display of mech icons on the maps. That would be consistent with preventing locks but still allow tactical and strategic play based on where the mechs are known to be.

[LordBraxton]

Strum Wealh, on 17 April 2015 - 12:26 PM, said:

Both of the above statements is false.

"BattleMechs are also not islands unto themselves. They can share sensor data to some extent, allowing greater sensory performance than a single ’Mech can achieve. The specialized equipment of a C3 system takes this to new heights with direct battlefield applications, but all BattleMechs can at least receive basic sensory data from a unit mate." - TechManual, page 39

"As much a revolution in battlefield technology as one of combat philosophy for its creators in the Draconis Combine, the system is essentially an elaborate tight-beam communications suite, designed to link the sensors and targeting systems of up to a full lance of friendly units in a single, closed network. The C3 system enables those within its network to draw targeting data from one another and coordinate fire with amazing ease. As long as effective weapon ranges and lines of fire permit, a member of a C3 network can essentially strike at a target with the same accuracy as the nearest friendly network member." - TechManual, page 209

C3 systems are simply a means for sharing more and better information (including, specifically, targeting and tracking information) with the other members of the same C3 network, but all 'Mechs canonically have the ability to share at least basic information with an allied unit - and it is this universal capability which is what's implemented in MWO currently.

Thanks for the eyeroll and the fluff text my pedantic friend.

In the rules, allies can't assist with targeting until you have a C3 system, and clanners don't focus fire AT ALL, til somebody else breaks the rules a few times first.

Find a better way to simulate zelbrigen and we'll talk.

Quxudica, on 17 April 2015 - 02:50 PM, said:

We can argue minutia all day, but I think it's reasonable to say that MWO's version of radar is extremely simplistic and not what is supposed to be available with zero extra equipment. Further I don't think it's at all a stretch to think it's an area of the game that is a missed opportunity for more interesting game mechanics.

+2 qft

[bad arcade kitty]

Mawai, on 17 April 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Maybe ECM should prevent targeting using R but not interfere with the display of mech icons on the maps. That would be consistent with preventing locks but still allow tactical and strategic play based on where the mechs are known to be.

it would ruin 90% of ecm usefulness because it's supposed to hide the position not to prevent locks
most of weapon don't need locks
then, it's better to pick ams instead of such ecm as you propose, lol

[Gas Guzzler]

bad arcade kitty, on 17 April 2015 - 02:55 PM, said:

it would ruin 90% of ecm usefulness because it's supposed to hide the position not to prevent locks
most of weapon don't need locks
then, it's better to pick ams instead of such ecm as you propose, lol

Not necessarily. Target info gives you loadout info as well as armor/structure status, which is very useful.

[bad arcade kitty]

do you pick cap/bap on every mech to speed up your very useful target gathering?

anyway hiding your mech from the radar is the very core of ecm
hiding others around your mech adds a new support role and therefore adds the overall fun
i don't understand people who want to nerf fun

[Gas Guzzler]

bad arcade kitty, on 17 April 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

do you pick cap/bap on every mech to speed up your very useful target gathering?

anyway hiding your mech from the radar is the very core of ecm
hiding others around your mech adds a new support role and therefore adds the overall fun
i don't understand people who want to nerf fun

No, but there is a difference between target info gathering time, and just not having it at all ever...

[Madcap72]

Stefka Kerensky, on 17 April 2015 - 01:06 PM, said:

(where is the dislike button?)...

Half the issue with the game and attitudes towards it is trying to reconcile turn based play set around a 10 second turn window based on a 30m hex. While certain aspects of TT mesh with realtime play, others don't. On the otherhand, Mechwarrior spans a TON of realtime games as well as novels. Battle tech uses dice and modifiers to simulate what might happen if a pilot takes certain action in a ten second time frame. In MWO you ARE the pilot, and everything is once again, happening in real time. So why cripple pilot skill, by trying to force it to do somthing that makes no sense? On top of that, MWO as a game is taking one pilot per mech who may or may not be good at teamwork and pitting them against another team. That is WILDLY differnt than TT, but directly in line with the novels.

As to the topic at hand, there is a third way to look at things, the implimentation of technology as it works in the real world, with real physics vs. what a guy in the 80's thought might be cool in a 80's table top RPG?


I think a blend of all three would make the game incredably fun as well as adressing some of the more akward balance issues above and beyond what basic teamwork can.

Mechwarrior is not Battletech, it's based on Battletech and it's been seperate for a long time.

I feel that MWO can capitalize on this by taking the best of evrything and not limiting itself to "But in the TT it works like this".

[Mystere]

Gas Guzzler, on 17 April 2015 - 02:57 PM, said:

Not necessarily. Target info gives you loadout info as well as armor/structure status, which is very useful.

Stealth >>> Target Info

[Agent 0 Fortune]

[STEF_]

Madcap72, on 17 April 2015 - 06:21 PM, said:

Half the issue with the game and attitudes towards it is trying to reconcile turn based play set around a 10 second turn window based on a 30m hex. While certain aspects of TT mesh with realtime play, others don't. On the otherhand, Mechwarrior spans a TON of realtime games as well as novels. Battle tech uses dice and modifiers to simulate what might happen if a pilot takes certain action in a ten second time frame. In MWO you ARE the pilot, and everything is once again, happening in real time. So why cripple pilot skill, by trying to force it to do somthing that makes no sense? On top of that, MWO as a game is taking one pilot per mech who may or may not be good at teamwork and pitting them against another team. That is WILDLY differnt than TT, but directly in line with the novels.

As to the topic at hand, there is a third way to look at things, the implimentation of technology as it works in the real world, with real physics vs. what a guy in the 80's thought might be cool in a 80's table top RPG?


I think a blend of all three would make the game incredably fun as well as adressing some of the more akward balance issues above and beyond what basic teamwork can.

Mechwarrior is not Battletech, it's based on Battletech and it's been seperate for a long time.

I feel that MWO can capitalize on this by taking the best of evrything and not limiting itself to "But in the TT it works like this".

All your quote has nothig to do with the fact that there are too much and there will be even more ECM mechs in the battlefield, and this will make radar display completely useless.

Re-read the op.
I'm interest in that part of the screen, THE RADAR, now, because PGI causes it to become the most useless piece of tecnology in human history. And it is ridicolus.
AND, this IS a battletech game.
If not, ask PGI to remove "a battletech game" from the title.

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 17 April 2015 - 10:34 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

what you want it's to remove a whole role from the game

it's pretty common for many games btw, people who love to do damage want to nerf supports, omg how dare they be useful not doing damage, they shouldn't be able to cover their teammates and should use their ecm only to do more damage themselves, damage, holy damage - it was your original post

[STEF_]

bad arcade kitty, on 17 April 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

do you pick cap/bap on every mech to speed up your very useful target gathering?

anyway hiding your mech from the radar is the very core of ecm
hiding others around your mech adds a new support role and therefore adds the overall fun
i don't understand people who want to nerf fun

Because having 12 ecm mech vs 12 ecm mech (that will happen in near future) is stupid.

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 17 April 2015 - 10:36 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

they may buff cap/bap, ppc or something

i believe it can be balanced without removing the ability to cover others

[MechWarrior3671771]

"Because having 12 ecm mech vs 12 ecm mech (that will happen in near future) is stupid."

Why can't you bring tag and bap?

[STEF_]

Fenrisulvyn, on 17 April 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

"Because having 12 ecm mech vs 12 ecm mech (that will happen in near future) is stupid."

Why can't you bring tag and bap?

Fenrisulvyn, on 17 April 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

"Because having 12 ecm mech vs 12 ecm mech (that will happen in near future) is stupid."

Why can't you bring tag and bap?

Again : READ the OP:
"I don't care if "yes, but there is voip" "but there is teamwork", "there is BAP", and this kind of runaround. I care about having that fricking radar screen working and being useful. Because it's the only part of BT we can have, imo."

[Madcap72]

Stefka Kerensky, on 17 April 2015 - 10:32 PM, said:

All your quote has nothig to do with the fact that there are too much and there will be even more ECM mechs in the battlefield, and this will make radar display completely useless.

Re-read the op.
I'm interest in that part of the screen, THE RADAR, now, because PGI causes it to become the most useless piece of tecnology in human history. And it is ridicolus.
AND, this IS a battletech game.
If not, ask PGI to remove "a battletech game" from the title.

Wouldn't it be crazy, if there was ways to counter than ECM? Tag, counter ECM, UAV, all that fun stuff?

Also, that "radar" screen is really just a battlemap that displays sensor data. To utalize your lines of resoning, should it NOT display sizmic sensor data as well as visual sightings?

Or are you willing to agree it's a synthesized display?

If you don't understand the functional differance between Battletech and Mechwarrior, and the simple annotation that MW is derived from BT I can't help you.

[STEF_]

Madcap72, on 18 April 2015 - 12:19 AM, said:

If you don't understand the functional differance between Battletech and Mechwarrior, and the simple annotation that MW is derived from BT I can't help you.

Sadly enough I can understand the difference, and that's why I wrote this thread.
But maybe it's you that cannot understand how this game is becoming crap as months pass.