180 replies to this topic

[Robot Kenshiro]

Soooooooo...I read lots of stuff and rage about targetting and info tech and all that jazz......but no one is raging about..... 40% reduction in CLAN laser max range.....heh I guess this must be on another thread... Oh im not raging or ranting atm, im just enjoying my pop corn

Edited by Robot Kenshiro, 14 October 2015 - 01:49 PM.

[Windsaw]

The game should never have had a hit indicator to begin with.
It should be removed altogether.

[WarHippy]

Prosperity Park, on 14 October 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

Here's a thread-closing statement:

Your reticule will not flash because there is no way your computers know if you hit a target or not, since you're not locked onto it... Your computer does not recognize the enemy mech as a "target" so there is no reason to flash. If you have no target acquisition, then your Mech's computer systems can't distinguish between you shooting a tree or an enemy.

So, no flash means more realism, and more dependence on targeting the enemy to know of you're dealing damage. No more magic hit indicators for unlocked targets.

Not true. Your mech is perfectly capable of tracking multiple enemy units at the same time hence multiple enemy units being designated on your hud and on your mini map. When you press R you are selecting a primary target and getting more info for that target in the form of the paper doll etc., but your mech is still tracking all of the other mechs and would be able to determine something as basic as hit confirmation. Outside of sensor range okay, but inside your sensor range there is no reason for the hit indicator not working.

[Kainen253]

I'm really trying to understand why this is such a big deal. I understand wanting shooter feedback - that is a valid concern. But the comments about rarely ever locking target? I don't understand it. Why wouldn't you lock target? Only two times I could understand not doing it - the target is visible but not able to lock due to range or ECM, or when literally in the middle of taking shots at multiple targets.

I just don't understand. And really hope this doesn't turn more into a flame fest based on my comment. Regardless of the current state of info warfare you'd think everyone would want to lock target of for no other reason that to let others know "hey, there's a target over here". God forbid you use the locked target info to determine where might be the best place to aim at on the target to push for a faster than average kill. But that too would just make too much sense.

[Piney II]

And all of the rage and QQ over a TEST.

LOL!

[Galenit]

WarHippy, on 14 October 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

Not true. Your mech is perfectly capable of tracking multiple enemy units at the same time hence multiple enemy units being designated on your hud and on your mini map. When you press R you are selecting a primary target and getting more info for that target in the form of the paper doll etc., but your mech is still tracking all of the other mechs and would be able to determine something as basic as hit confirmation. Outside of sensor range okay, but inside your sensor range there is no reason for the hit indicator not working.

How does it detect a hit and if its hitting a mech or a rock?

Lets take a missile:
It can give you information on hit/detonation, but in this moment, the transmitter is gone, you know it is destroyed, but not if its destroyed by hitting a mech, a rock or if its killed by ams.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Galenit, on 14 October 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

From a cuttinglaser, just to explain why a not focused laser does less damage:

If you have no lock, you will do unfocused damage,
if you lock, your targetcomputer can focus the lasers on the target.

No space magic involved.

Makes sense, but we have a range finder built into the targeting reticule that's likely a simple laser range finder so it could be explained that the weapon lasers use the laser range finder to focus.

But it is an explanation we can go with.

[sycocys]

Kainen253, on 14 October 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

I'm really trying to understand why this is such a big deal. I understand wanting shooter feedback - that is a valid concern. But the comments about rarely ever locking target? I don't understand it. Why wouldn't you lock target? Only two times I could understand not doing it - the target is visible but not able to lock due to range or ECM, or when literally in the middle of taking shots at multiple targets.

I just don't understand. And really hope this doesn't turn more into a flame fest based on my comment. Regardless of the current state of info warfare you'd think everyone would want to lock target of for no other reason that to let others know "hey, there's a target over here". God forbid you use the locked target info to determine where might be the best place to aim at on the target to push for a faster than average kill. But that too would just make too much sense.

It's mostly the people that are about the 1500+ meter erLL sniping that are complaining from what I can tell. One concerned about high ping vs locking/aquisition but the more I think about that, that is all done on server side so it's happening despite their ping and really shouldn't be an issue.

ECM isn't going to continue to block targeting - even if its current test iteration isn't spot on, I can pretty well guarantee that is going to make it to the live update. So people can't complain about not being able to get targets and locks because of uber broken ecm anymore.

So mostly its just people moaning because its a change, and they'll have to learn to adjust their play to fit something more complex.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Galenit, on 14 October 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

How does it detect a hit and if its hitting a mech or a rock?

Lets take a missile:
It can give you information on hit/detonation, but in this moment, the transmitter is gone, you know it is destroyed, but not if its destroyed by hitting a mech, a rock or if its killed by ams.

Hits in modern aircraft are determined not by the missile but by the aircraft's RADAR and that's determined by the missile exploding (which is picked up my the RADAR) and by the RADAR no longer detecting the enemy aircraft.

In ground based radars, we detect artillery impacts, so we knew where it hits.

But it still requires eyes on target to determine if it was a successful hit or an adjust fire is needed.

In essence, I like that we no longer get a hit marker on unlocked targets as there was no equipment observing a the target for a hit to relay that to the HUD. So either lock-up your target or use your Mk.1 'eyeballs' to observe the hit.

[Dimento Graven]

WarHippy, on 14 October 2015 - 11:45 AM, said:

It still makes sense to have the feedback if people bother to think a little. People keep saying that it doesn't make sense to get feedback from shooting at a target that you are not targeting, but it actually does. When you press R you are selecting your primary target that you want the most info on hence the paper doll, but the mech is still tracking all of the other mechs simultaneously which is why you see multiple enemy mechs on your mini map and doritos over multiple mechs. Your mech letting you know that a hit was detected even though it was not the primary target is completely reasonable.

Personally, I think this is a bad idea and fully unneeded. It isn't a matter of needing to press R because I do all the time, but there are plenty of scenarios that might have me firing on a target I am not currently targeting. I will test it out to see how it goes, but this is one of those things you don't really need to test to know it is going to be a bad idea based on personal experience.

I disagree, while yes, the targeting computer can note "non-friendly" mech positions, for any 'mech in frontal view of a friendly or in front of you, that's, it can be argued logically, a 'passive' scan event. 'Passive' scanning is something that won't really tell you anything beyond, "It's 'there', and it's 'moving this direction', and 'facing this direction.' Beyond that, you know nothing.

Now when you actually target something, you're actively scanning that target, and you of course, get LOTS more info: What kind of 'mech it is, what its percentage health is, where it's crit, weapons load out, etc. etc. etc.

Honestly reporting damage on something you're not actively targeting makes no logical sense, HOWEVER, as a stop gap while PGI fixes (or more probably, does very little to) the bastardized Crysis3 engine they're using to resolve terrain drawing issues, it's good to have the game report whether you're hitting or not, JUST SO, we don't spend an entire 50 tons of ammo on an object that has an invisible rock/wall/what have you, between you and it.

Fix the engine, then change the reticule function. Until the engine can reliably draw EVERYTHING between you and your target, it's a bad idea.

[Deathlike]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 14 October 2015 - 02:12 PM, said:

In essence, I like that we no longer get a hit marker on unlocked targets as there was no equipment observing a the target for a hit to relay that to the HUD. So either lock-up your target or use your Mk.1 'eyeballs' to observe the hit.

While your eyes tell you one thing... according to the server, it could simply say 'nope".

SRMs know this well... even with the paperdoll confirming the non-damage.

Edited by Deathlike, 14 October 2015 - 02:16 PM.

[Death Proof]

l33tworks, on 14 October 2015 - 03:33 AM, said:

Now there will be scenarios where I will be shooting mechs in plain sight and not know whether I am doing damage?
How can they possibly think thats ok? Do PGI not realise its a server side game? How will i know I am hitting a mech? Its the same as a Bank account that doesn't let you see how much money you have in it. Its Insane.

I guess I can see being annoyed by this proposal...but it actually makes more sense then you are giving credit.

You can't see your balance in your banking account unless you are logged into your account...much the same as you can't get a damage detection with your sensors unless your target is locked and feeding that info.

[orcrist86]

People act like to can't tell if your hitting. Turn heat glow on and look for smoke on your target. Mk1 eyeball requires effort.

[dario03]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 14 October 2015 - 02:12 PM, said:

Hits in modern aircraft are determined not by the missile but by the aircraft's RADAR and that's determined by the missile exploding (which is picked up my the RADAR) and by the RADAR no longer detecting the enemy aircraft.

In ground based radars, we detect artillery impacts, so we knew where it hits.

But it still requires eyes on target to determine if it was a successful hit or an adjust fire is needed.

In essence, I like that we no longer get a hit marker on unlocked targets as there was no equipment observing a the target for a hit to relay that to the HUD. So either lock-up your target or use your Mk.1 'eyeballs' to observe the hit.

Anything that hits when you or your team don't have LOS sure. But like you said a couple of posts up, your reticule has a range finder so even without lock I think if you have LOS it should light up.

[sycocys]

If you are shooting at a mech long enough to overheat and don't have have a target to press R on. You are probably doing something wrong.

I think the target acquisition was going to be set to 0 seconds base with whatever info modifiers they are planning, last time most were like 2-3 seconds it looked like at the most one way or the other. Bap shaves off a chunk. CC shaves off a chunk. Target data module I think does as well.

Trying to tear this apart - first without any information on the info systems is totally pointless - and second without actually seeing how it works in a game is even more pointless.

[Galenit]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 14 October 2015 - 02:06 PM, said:

Makes sense, but we have a range finder built into the targeting reticule that's likely a simple laser range finder so it could be explained that the weapon lasers use the laser range finder to focus.

But it is an explanation we can go with.

The range finder has not the needed precision.

From another topic about the same thing: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4762584
Just to show how a laser is used in a lab with a static laser, a static target and a clean room without any tremors, because the table floats on air.

Now think about to put this on a walking mech,
try to focus all lasers from different locations to one point,
compensate the movement of the mech and the target,
compensate tremors (a little tremor on a single mirror will put your laser to a discolaser doing no damage),
dont miss to compensate atmospheric scatter,
and that about the whole duration.

If you dont want spacemagic, you also need to reduce laser damage on all maps with lots of particels in the air, like terra or caustic.

Edited by Galenit, 14 October 2015 - 02:34 PM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

dario03, on 14 October 2015 - 02:23 PM, said:

Anything that hits when you or your team don't have LOS sure. But like you said a couple of posts up, your reticule has a range finder so even without lock I think if you have LOS it should light up.

Range finders determine 'what I'm looking at is x meters away.'

I would imagine the TC that has a mech actively targeted basically saying 'you shot an AC20 and the projectile didn't impact the target' or 'you shot an AC20 and the projectile impacted the target'

For RADARs to determine hits or misses on ordnance, it has to do multi-tracking. It has to track the target and it has to track the the projectile. If the tracked projectile stops being tracked at the same location as the tracked target then it's a 'hit.'

For the TC to detect hits with lasers/PPCs I imagine it does a thermal scan on the armor/internals saying 'hey, that spot your lasers are hitting is really hot and melting armor off.' Something a range finder can't do.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Galenit, on 14 October 2015 - 02:28 PM, said:

The range finder has not the needed precision.

From another topic about the same thing: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4762584
Just to show how a laser is used in a lab with a static laser, a static target and a clean room without any tremors, because the table floats on air.

Now think about to put this on a walking mech,
try to focus all lasers from different locations to one point,
compensate the movement of the mech and the target,
compensate tremors (a little tremor on a single mirror will put your laser to a discolaser doing no damage),
dont miss to compensate atmospheric scatter,
and that about the whole duration.

If you dont want spacemagic, you also need to reduce laser damage on all maps with lots of particels in the air, like terra or caustic.

That's... hmmm... I'm gonna learn today!

Also, from reading all that, it sounds like using a chemical reaction to launch a physical object is the most efficient way to kill things... ha

[dario03]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 14 October 2015 - 02:36 PM, said:

Range finders determine 'what I'm looking at is x meters away.'

I would imagine the TC that has a mech actively targeted basically saying 'you shot an AC20 and the projectile didn't impact the target' or 'you shot an AC20 and the projectile impacted the target'

For RADARs to determine hits or misses on ordnance, it has to do multi-tracking. It has to track the target and it has to track the the projectile. If the tracked projectile stops being tracked at the same location as the tracked target then it's a 'hit.'

For the TC to detect hits with lasers/PPCs I imagine it does a thermal scan on the armor/internals saying 'hey, that spot your lasers are hitting is really hot and melting armor off.' Something a range finder can't do.

Yeah but who says you can't have a long range heat checker or maybe a secondary targeting computer that is passive or whatever. Its not like everything in this game makes sense anyways.

[DjPush]

Really? Your first time getting mad at a video game?