12 replies to this topic

[Sergeant Random]

On paper, we judge mechs using 3 dimensions: Firepower, Durability and Agility. (For the sake of simplicity, I will leave out hardpoints and hitboxes from this discussion).

I would like to point out that the game code allows plenty of design space to give our mechs 2 more dimensions: Awareness and Stealthiness.

The code for modifying sensor ranges and speed of acquiring target or target data is evidently in the game. We see it in the form of electronic warfare equipment and sensor modules (Active Probe, ECM, Targeting Computer, Command Console, and all the sensor modules).

To differentiate our mechs along the dimensions of Awareness and Stealthiness we only need chassis specific quirks along these lines. (Maybe in the future we can have the relevant pilot skills too).

Let me start simple by defining Awareness and Stealthiness in terms of ONLY Detection Range = R. The current default detection range is 800m so we will start from there. Let us assume that the average mech with average Awareness will detect another average mech with average Stealthiness at 800m. Let's say these mechs were Hunchbacks.

We will quantify Awareness with Sensor Strength = A and Stealthiness with Chassis Signature = S. Given our assumptions, this works out as Detection Range = R = (A)(S) 800m. This equation makes Detection Range = R directly proportional to A and S. Our 1st Hunchback example will have A = 1 for its sensor and S = 1 for the target 2nd Hunchback ... That works out to R = (1)(1) 800m.

If our Hunchback can detect an Atlas further out at 1000m, then the Atlas will have S = 1.25. If the Hunchback can detect a Locust at 600m then the Locust will have S = 0.75.

Now we have a base equation that establishes the relationship between sensor strength and chassis signature, we can play around with giving mechs different strengths and weaknesses along these new dimensions. The good thing after this is that chassis/skill/equipment/module modifiers can now have a starting point. And mechs can be balanced by more than just Firepower, Durability and Agility.

And that has only discussed Detection Range. There is still the speed of acquiring a target, the speed of acquiring target data, target decay, (seismic? and other vision modes?). Maybe PGI hasn't used this design space because they wanted to balance what we currently have before adding more to the mix.

I hope they have amazing plans.

<!!! More Extra Stuff !!!>

Lovers of Active/Passive radar can find something interesting here, too - because Passive can now be just chassis quirk modifiers to the chassis default stealthiness and sensor strength. Active/Passive can be set to the ECM toggle "J". So everyone can join in on the stealth.

To give more personality to zoom modes, I think zooming in should also give you +X% current detection range (zoom value could also be a chassis quirk) BUT restricted to your field of view. So an LRM boat can sit in passive radar and scan around using zoom. The restricted field of view balances the bonus detection range comboed with the passive radar stealth. Or the LRM boat can zoom using active radar for even more range than default.

[Light-Speed]

Sounds awesome.

It'll be fun if they increase the Sneakiness of lights...

Imagine the Flea if that gets here... lol

[CtrlAltWheee]

I like the idea of variable radar ranges based on tonnage.

The problem is how to communicate it effectively in-game. Also to make the math easy in my head while I'm playing and managing ranges for lasers, lrms, srms, ecm, bap, etc.

For the most part I know how far my enemies weapons can reach and play around that. Is it necessary to communicate parts of this to players? I can't do that math in my head very quickly. If an atlas is +25% sensor range then a 65 ton mech is (.65)(25) would be about... +15%? multiplied times 800m is... 900ish. I like to know my exact limits when scouting. Once I get detected, the lrm spotting game is over.

Not sure if it's super important. Been getting along fine with all the range increases via quirks, so who knows. Kudos for putting forward a solution.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Interesting idea.

But mech sensors don't function based on size, surface area or mass parameters. A shutdown atlas could be 5 feet away and your sensors wouldn't detect it, unless BAP was equipped.

The way sensors in this genre function is via detecting the energy signature of fusion reactors. Maybe an alternate format could be devised based on engine size and type.

But truth be told, afaik game developers actively limit the number of variables that need to be balanced in game due to them being so heavily intensive. If anything were to be balanced, mech scaling and hitbox geometry would probably be prioritized higher than sensor profile or sensor detection balancing.

Good idea though, its nice to see someone thinking.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 22 July 2015 - 02:39 PM.

[Sergeant Random]

I know adding more variables to the mech balancing quandary could be hit or miss. But mechs with low firepower (say the Spider or Summoner) could be given advantages in sensor strength and/or stealthiness.

You only need to put quirks and design additional UI to display the relevant information.

Edited by Sergeant Random, 22 July 2015 - 07:32 PM.

[kesmai]

Well add the mad if your at it...

[Sergeant Random]

Necroing thread...

[RedDevil]

Didn't Russ already mention that they want to do this sort of thing to differentiate "role warfare" more? I think it was in the last Town Hall meeting, but I could be wrong.

[zagibu]

Still a great idea. Love it for its simplicity.

[Sergeant Random]

CtrlAltWheee, on 22 July 2015 - 01:08 PM, said:

I like the idea of variable radar ranges based on tonnage.

The problem is how to communicate it effectively in-game. Also to make the math easy in my head while I'm playing and managing ranges for lasers, lrms, srms, ecm, bap, etc.

For the most part I know how far my enemies weapons can reach and play around that. Is it necessary to communicate parts of this to players? I can't do that math in my head very quickly. If an atlas is +25% sensor range then a 65 ton mech is (.65)(25) would be about... +15%? multiplied times 800m is... 900ish. I like to know my exact limits when scouting. Once I get detected, the lrm spotting game is over.

Not sure if it's super important. Been getting along fine with all the range increases via quirks, so who knows. Kudos for putting forward a solution.

Yeah, doing that math (on the fly, in the heat of battle) would be a b!+ch... I discussed this with another and a viable solution would be a HUD warning that you are being pinged by hostile radar (maybe while you are in passive radar mode).

That could also work if radar is not instant but sort of has a mini-timer when a target is in range... sort of a reverse target decay - but working out stats for that will be extra work of course. If that is so you might have a small window to turn around before you get completely detected.

That may be good for passive vs active, but for passive vs passive I think it would be more exciting if you really don't know. Maybe use Eyeball Mark II to detect the enemy.

Edited by Sergeant Random, 11 August 2015 - 03:54 AM.

[Lugh]

This is PGI, I fear even this relatively simple math is beyond them, because they couldn't properly implement a 2.9% jam rate over a 10 second term.

Somehow to them that equates to 25%, when it should be .3% on any given second, and almost never occur. Then you can make it permanent and no one would care.

[LordNothing]

i was rather impressed with the electronic warfare found in MWLL. it took what previous mechwarrior games had done and really honed it to perfection. its not quite kosher for the tt crowd but it was good, well thought out, and it worked. mwo pretty much threw all that in the trash and did its own thing, what i view as a highly simplified and dumbed down system for the masses.

i want things like active/passive radar, option to choose aecm/gecm equipment, targeting controls beyond r, i want targeting computers/command consoles that do something worthy of the pod space they consume, direct fire missiles (unless teamwork), as well some of the things the op said (make balence 5 dimensional!)..

[Dino Might]

I Zeratul I, on 22 July 2015 - 02:36 PM, said:

Interesting idea.

But mech sensors don't function based on size, surface area or mass parameters. A shutdown atlas could be 5 feet away and your sensors wouldn't detect it, unless BAP was equipped.

The way sensors in this genre function is via detecting the energy signature of fusion reactors. Maybe an alternate format could be devised based on engine size and type.

But truth be told, afaik game developers actively limit the number of variables that need to be balanced in game due to them being so heavily intensive. If anything were to be balanced, mech scaling and hitbox geometry would probably be prioritized higher than sensor profile or sensor detection balancing.

Good idea though, its nice to see someone thinking.

Bigger reactor = more power output = more significant energy signature (assuming shielding is not significantly different), so size does matter there.

I'm assuming, based on what you described, that we've got compact neutrino detectors of some sort (you know, space magic) that we're using as the primary sensor.

For other sensors, size does matter, but maybe not as much as other factors such as shape, surface coatings, height (offset from ground clutter). Most of this is based on understanding of radar, but remember that radar is just looking at energy reflections. Other systems, like laser rangefinders are similarly spoofed by altering reflectivity characteristics, just at different wavelengths. So for the radar, lidar, seismic type sensors, it makes total sense for bigger mechs to be detectable from further away, but the real question is, "by how much?"