31 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

I think size archetype rather than tonnage should determine detection radius

Ranges you'd detect mechs at:
tiny 400m
small 500m
medium 600m
large 700m
huge 800m

the advantage of doing it this way is that mechs can be moved into different size archetypes as needed. It gives more flexibility than basing it directly off tonnage. Plus its just simpler only having 5 different detection archetypes instead of a 16 youd have in a tonnage based system.


ECM should also be nerfed so it only stealths the mech its equipped on. And instead of reducing detection range to 200m it should halve the base detection range.

Ranges you'd detect ECM'd mechs at:
tiny 200m
small 250m
medium 300m
large 250m
huge 400m


Lastly, rather than hard countering ECM at short range, BAP should increase the range you can detect ECM'd mechs by 25%. BAP should also increase the range you detect non-ECM mechs by 25%.

Ranges you'd detect ECM'd mechs at with BAP:
tiny 250m
small 313m
medium 375m
large 438m
huge 500m

Ranges you'd detect non-ECM'd mechs at with BAP:
tiny 500m
small 625m
medium 750m
large 875m
huge 1000m


And yes before people flip their !@#$ LRMs would have to be completely rebalanced around the new detection ranges.

Edited by Khobai, 09 June 2015 - 09:56 AM.

[Tombstoner]

No its too much work. PGI has other more important issues like getting ready for the steam launch / cash grab.

[Khobai]

Except if the game launches on steam in its current state it wont be successful...

[Dimento Graven]

Khobai, on 09 June 2015 - 09:58 AM, said:

Except if the game launches on steam in its current state it wont be successful...

That's actually debatable.

The game is fairly good now, enough to grab a lot of new players, and IF, they can maintain the current rate of content development (not counting new 'mech packages) they ought to be able to maintain a moderate level of interest.

I've seen worse come out on Steam and appear to be profitable...

[Almond Brown]

Dimento Graven, on 09 June 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

I disagree. All that the warning does is let me know that, somewhere within a 250 meter radius there's a light with ECM. >>IF<< I happen to have a UAV, I "may" launch it just to find out where the little bugger is.

I'm sorry but from the perspective of someone who has repeatedly shot enough gauss and lasers into light 'mechs to level 3 Atlas's only to have the light 'mech dance off merrily away with MAYBE an open location, no, let's not exacerbate weak hit detection, poorly implemented HSR, non-sensicle quirks, and ping/lag induced warp issues, to allow light 'mechs to become the new "assault" class.

By eliminating the 'warning' of sensor/HUD interference when an ECM'd 'mech is near only adds to the supposed 'god factor' that the anti-ECM crowd are complaining about now. Leave that is, and find something else, less imbalancing to suggest.

I thought the OP's idea was to make it harder for Lights to be detected at range? Would removal of that "warning" not help with that. It is like a FREE Seismic against Light ECM carries... Can't have that right? LOL!

[Dimento Graven]

Almond Brown, on 09 June 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

I thought the OP's idea was to make it harder for Lights to be detected at range? Would removal of that "warning" not help with that. It is like a FREE Seismic against Light ECM carries... Can't have that right? LOL!

Unlike seismic all the ECM interference on your HUD does is let you know that an enemy ECM is around. It doesn't tell you from what direction they're coming from, if they're moving towards you or away from you, or at all.

All things that seismic can actually do, so it's FAR from a 'free' seismic against, LightALL ECM carriers.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 09 June 2015 - 10:14 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Khobai, on 09 June 2015 - 09:58 AM, said:

Except if the game launches on steam in its current state it wont be successful...

And sensors aren't even remotely middle of the list why this game wouldn't be successful on Steam in it's current state, they wouldn't even be ON the list.

NPE would be the top 10 reasons why it wouldn't do well on Steam right now. The 'grind' would be the next 10 on the list.

Really, the grind in MWO is nothing compared to most games I've played online, but hey, most of the MWO playerbase seem to have never played another online game at all, so what do I know?

[Dimento Graven]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 June 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

And sensors aren't even remotely middle of the list why this game wouldn't be successful on Steam in it's current state, they wouldn't even be ON the list.

NPE would be the top 10 reasons why it wouldn't do well on Steam right now. The 'grind' would be the next 10 on the list.

Really, the grind in MWO is nothing compared to most games I've played online, but hey, most of the MWO playerbase seem to have never played another online game at all, so what do I know?

I dunno, while not at all the best comparison I look at this game and compare it to TF2.

TF2 sucked balls when it came out on Steam, had very few maps, weapon choices were 'iffy' and sometimes 'complex', and class balance was significantly (and for that matter pretty much still is) in an extreme state of F'd.

TF2 over time became a VERY successful title, and has a lot of content (not a small part being player generated interestingly enough).

I think MWO would be starting on firmer ground than TF2 did.

[JC Daxion]

PhoenixFire55, on 09 June 2015 - 04:56 AM, said:

Which brings us to another important question. Should detection range and see loadout / damaged parts ranges be same? But as I said, all these discussions are pointless as long as all we have is direct LoS passive sensor detection.

I would do something like...

Basic sensor, .5 tons Range to detect ECM 125, Max range target 400

Standard, 1 ton, Range to detect ECM 175, Max range 525, Can add BAP

intermediate, 1.5 tons, range to detect ECM 200, 650 Max target, Can target internals, Speed to target improve ( can add BAP)


Advanced, 2.0 tons, Range to detect ECM 250, Max target range 775, Can target internals, Speed to target improved, Can add BAP...


Something along those lines.. Needing to spend a bit more weight on sensors, would mean Less weapons, ammo, or heat sinks.. dropping total DPS a bit, Those that did not, would be much more vulnerable to hit and run/sneak attacks, as people could not target so no blips on the radar.. and that sorta thing.

Is this balanced? I have no clue, but this is something i was thinking about.. let ever mech at least get to standard, and only certain mechs get to intermediate and advanced.


So basically, people with basic sensors, have an issue targeting anything over the Brawl range..

standard, you are starting to get into the medium range area, But also let you BAP, because i think Bap should be an upgrade for all mechs..

intermediate, finally you spent enough weight your targeting sensors will now work, Stack BAP to speed it up..

advanced, the longest range, fastest sensors.. but you did spend a bit of weight, 3.5 tons for max sensors. You could also add a JAM sensor ability, that works like a mini short duration, short range ECM that covers only you., Say for Charging a turret, or running across a lane that you know an LRM boat is Maybe something like 10 secs of ECM, and a 30 sec cool down? sorta a crappy ECM bonus, for an extra .5 tons over the classic.. Where this sensor shines is it's range and targeting info speed.. I could see an LRM mech using something like this to peak out of cover under ECM to grab a lock, and back off..protecting it self..


Note this is sorta brainstorming sensors in the current game..

Almond Brown, on 09 June 2015 - 05:15 AM, said:

So you want that info provided from targets you can't actually see? You want it via what method, detection sensors? How is a sensor to determine open section on a non-visible target? At least with direct LoS, one can suspend belief that the Sensors are providing a mapping of the visual target, thus indicating areas of missing mass of a known entity.

MWO has many Tech upgrades that increase the ability to get that Data at long ranges if that is what is wanted. But see Rule #1 below...

Adding more weigh to get more Sensor range would end the same way as the current Tech is used.

Rule #1 - If it don't Dakka or Wub, 99.9% of players ain't carrying it, especially if it takes away slots or adds weight.

The IS Command Console and Clan versions of said gear prove that. Level 1(1t) for Clan and almost 0(zero) use of the I.S. CC(3T) is the norm. That is not a coincidence btw.

No, i never said i wanted non-line of sight.;.. read above for more info about what i am talking about.. So yea.. if you read it i am saying, Nerf sensors! Spend weight to get better sensors than we have now...

I also think command consoles could use a complete over haul,... but a good time would be a complete sensor over haul too..

Edited by JC Daxion, 09 June 2015 - 11:01 AM.

[Koniving]

Kristov Kerensky, on 08 June 2015 - 11:39 AM, said:

The Mechs are all supposed to be in the same height range, PGI's scaling for the masses is the only reason a Locust isn't almost as tall as an Atlas like it supposed to be(15m Atlas, 12m Locust).

8 to 14 meters on average, with the tallest mech until 3055 being the Clan Executioner (14.4 meters). (The Maus tank is 10 meters long not counting the turret.)


The Shadowhawk is 9.63 meters (55 tons), and the reasoning behind the extreme height of the Locust is 1) an elevated position from which to fire down upon infantry as well as to spot from and 2) a physical requirement [from a lore perspective] of long, thin legs with which to achieve the high speeds of 129 kph. Even then, the Clan Firemoth is written as tall enough for a Locust to look up to, which is canonically established at 11.4 meters tall when measuring to the highest point (the arms).
Note the Artist's name. Original Battletech author / first novelist William H. Keith.



In the center is the original BT author's scale. Our right is MWO's scale. On the left is a 55 ton tank. Which one fits better?
(Note that this covers the canonical height of the "2" series of Shadowhawks. The "3" and "5" series such as the 5M are a fair bit larger in order to fit things like double heatsinks, XL engines, and Endo Steel (requiring more internal space, requiring larger frames and bodies). The slot system may be a generic universal standard, but the mechs aren't intended and are canonically mentioned to not have that much space. Atlases like the D and RS couldn't fit a proper 20 tube LRM-20 and instead had a rapid reload 5 tube launcher mounted at the hip (SRMs came from the chest). The Atlas K is the first exception to this, replacing the SRM launcher with a proper LRM-20.

To note:
The Hunchback in MWO is 13.6 meters tall. In BT, it's barely more than 8 meters tall; the large drum on its back is always placed where its ammunition would be, as the mech is physically not large enough to store its ammo internally. (4SP holds the ammo in the CT; low and behold the art for it in BT has the drum mounted directly behind the CT. All others have it LT only, low and behold the Hunchbacks all have a left torso drum.) An M1 Abrams tank is 7.93 meters long, almost as long as a Hunchback (and by extension the same height but much slimmer Commando) is tall.

It wasn't until Wizkids began rewriting Battletech canon that mechs got to be so rediculously sized as "17 meters" for an Annihilator (which before then was shorter than an Atlas) or the most preposterous one -- 25 meters tall.

(Yay typo; but laziness). Seriously though the grasp of realism here is pretty low. So anything beyond FASA is pretty much 'dead' to me.

That said... The sensor ranges of double blind rules had a weird sort of 'automatic' sensor range set; at least in Megamek's interpretation. One moment you might have 16 hexes worth, the next you might be limited to 0-8 hexes, then you could have up to 16-32 hexes of sensor range. Some mechs could get 0-32 hexes meaning they wouldn't be blind up close even if they are scanning long range. Command mechs have their own sensor quirks as well. All in all it's sort of mixed.

The big thing is that in BT anything could die in a single shot... and at the same time most things didn't. BT has a HUGE problem in the tabletop where it has massive front loaded damage, but this is due in part to combat being summarized. Even so the damage isn't highly focused against a single body part all at the same time without repercussions. In MWO you can channel 13 ER PPCs onto the same body part, eat some ice cream and do it again. In BT just firing 6 ER PPCs would practically kill the pilot, collapse the mech, etc.

Light mechs can perish in a single glance. Meanwhile assaults are something the lights have to get close to be effective against.

I can see some good reason for Prosperity's idea in how MWO is designed.

[Kristov Kerensky]

I'm all too aware of how messed up the heights in the old FASA works are, and I've glanced at some of the redone heights in the CBT stuff, 18-24m..are you kidding me? I know the problems with the scales in MWO are that they have the Atlas being twice as tall as a Commando, when it's NOT supposed to be that way.

I posted a link of an OLD Clan Mech Size chart as well as a list of Mech heights compiled by someone using the novels. 2 different heights for the Victor by 2 different authors in the list. The old chart shows the Nova is shorter than the Adder and BOTH are under 9m, which makes both of them shorter than a Commando at 9m. I've seen 2 different people use the CryEngine editor to show the height of an Atlas in MWO, 17m by one person, 19m by another, BOTH using the editor to show the size, which is correct? either way, that would make the Commando approx 9m tall which means IT is scaled properly and everything else is fubar.

Sensors being able to detect by size of the Mech, silly, you know it as well as I do, size of the Mech has nothing to do with how well sensors can detect or not detect a Mech. Fusion reactors, regardless of size, put out enough easy to detect emissions that the size of what Mech it's in has no bearing on this, not to mention that I've got Lights with engines as big as my Heavies and Assaults, so engine size doesn't matter either.

And since we start with a 750m sensor range to begin with, need LoS to GET a sensor lock, and it's all too easy to avoid getting in that LoS, there's no reason to make Lights only be detected when they are closer than larger Mechs, they are already too damn close at 750m in the first place. And since I can and often do sneak up with my Atlas, King Crab and Dire Wolf, why does it need to be harder to detect a Light in the first place?

I'm all for a revamp of the sensor system in MWO, but silly ass things like smaller Mechs are harder to detect..really? That's not even remotely needed, nor does it actually make any damn sense.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

I want a return of Mechwarrior's classic "Radar" modes. Active and passive modes, the ability for ECM and BAP to have additional uses... ect.

I have no idea why radar was done the way it's been in this game... I mean come on, we've had 3 other games and expansions that handled MW's radar system simply, elegantly, and gave things like ECM and BAP more reasoning...

Then MWO comes along and says "screw that noise, we do what we want!"

You've had literally now 20 years of Mechwarrior video games to draw from, and you ignored it all... GG PGI.