75 replies to this topic

[DieGruneMorder]

So a laser that is fired at a target that is not locked on will receive less damage?? Im sorry, but this has been my favorite game for years now, and I want to be positive, but this is DUMB AS HELL. It doesnt even make any sense at all. Am I supposed to believe that because a reticle isnt visually surrounding the mech, the lasers i have equipped are going to downtune themselves because im breaking the law or something. Lasers fire ....in a straight line....they may lose SOME intensity with distance...and then they hit their target....boom...thats it!!! So you're running and gunning with a light or medium, you shoot to the left at a flanking mech...no target lock....sorry dude, lasers are just less effective. This is THE DUMBEST NERF EVER!! Even worse than the hover-jets that do almost nothing!!! WTF PGI??!! You just further buffed LURMS and PEEPS...sounds like lots of fun...

Edited by DieGruneMorder, 14 October 2015 - 07:24 PM.

[Sader325]

It's really not that bad.

That being said, havent seen the target delay portion yet.

But as of right now, its not that bad.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

The technobabble for this one is easier than most.

Lasers rely on focusing lenses. Atmospheric distortions, lens alignment, etc., all contribute to a laser not being properly focused on the point of impact, thereby lessening the damage transfer. A target lock gives the lenses a corrected range at which to set the focus, compensating for all the variables and allowing for improved damage transfer.

[DAYLEET]

pick a target, shoot it, rinse, repeat.

[Wintersdark]

DieGruneMorder, on 14 October 2015 - 07:22 PM, said:

So a laser that is fired at a target that is not locked on will receive less damage?? Im sorry, but this has been my favorite game for years now, and I want to be positive, but this is DUMB AS HELL. It doesnt even make any sense at all. Am I supposed to believe that because a reticle isnt visually surrounding the mech, the lasers i have equipped are going to downtune themselves because im breaking the law or something. Lasers fire ....in a straight line....they may lose SOME intensity with distance...and then they hit their target....boom...thats it!!! So you're running and gunning with a light or medium, you shoot to the left at a flanking mech...no target lock....sorry dude, lasers are just less effective. This is THE DUMBEST NERF EVER!! Even worse than the hover-jets that do almost nothing!!! WTF PGI??!! You just further buffed LURMS and PEEPS...sounds like lots of fun...

Focal distance. The targeting computer needs to focus them for a particular range.

It's no more or less ridiculous than how lasers already work in Battletech - ridiculously short ranges.

Yes, this all does make LRM's and PPC's more useful in that Lasers are not quite as good (but still very good - after all, pressing R is hardly difficult) but LRM's where *TERRIBLE* before this due to ECM, and PPC's are objectively inferior to lasers, even now.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

The technobabble for this one is easier than most.

Lasers rely on focusing lenses. Atmospheric distortions, lens alignment, etc., all contribute to a laser not being properly focused on the point of impact, thereby lessening the damage transfer. A target lock gives the lenses a corrected range at which to set the focus, compensating for all the variables and allowing for improved damage transfer.

That my friends is how you sell this change.

Wintersdark, on 14 October 2015 - 07:29 PM, said:

Focal distance. The targeting computer needs to focus them for a particular range.

It's no more or less ridiculous than how lasers already work in Battletech - ridiculously short ranges.

Yes, this all does make LRM's and PPC's more useful in that Lasers are not quite as good (but still very good - after all, pressing R is hardly difficult) but LRM's where *TERRIBLE* before this due to ECM, and PPC's are objectively inferior to lasers, even now.

Short range of the weapons is due to space magic armor that's really really hard to break. So you need absurd amounts of dakka, heat, or explosives to damage it.

Edited by Narcissistic Martyr, 14 October 2015 - 07:38 PM.

[DieGruneMorder]

DAYLEET, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

pick a target, shoot it, rinse, repeat.

That would be great....if this were 1 on 1. How many times have i been chilling with the Lance defending around a corner and multiple Mechs creep around....oh no even though they are at the same distance, and they're right next to each other, NOPE!! You're only locked on the one next to it...40 percent damage......DUMB AS F!

[MischiefSC]

This patch isn't about fixing LRMs and SRMs or MGs or Flamers. It's just the first potentially useful introduction of Information Warfare in having it impact the viability of lasers beyond brawling.

That's it.

That's all.

Seriously, you guys as a community are going way to far when I end up White Knighting.

[DieGruneMorder]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

The technobabble for this one is easier than most.

Lasers rely on focusing lenses. Atmospheric distortions, lens alignment, etc., all contribute to a laser not being properly focused on the point of impact, thereby lessening the damage transfer. A target lock gives the lenses a corrected range at which to set the focus, compensating for all the variables and allowing for improved damage transfer.

Two mechs, 3 feet apart...same distance, you're in-between them perfectly from 400m ....the lens has to "focus" how much? GIVE ME A BREAK DUDE!!

[sycocys]

MischiefSC, on 14 October 2015 - 07:31 PM, said:

Seriously, you guys as a community are going way to far when I end up White Knighting.

At least someone else knows how I feel. I'm one of the more very critical people concerning PGI and just about everything they do, and this is possibly the most sane iteration of change I've seen to date.

[DieGruneMorder]

DAYLEET, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

pick a target, shoot it, rinse, repeat.

Multiple Mechs...equal distance one full dmg. the one RIGHT NEXT TO IT locked on you ...full dmg. ....yet you can do 45%. Great change, and scientific to boot!

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

DieGruneMorder, on 14 October 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

That would be great....if this were 1 on 1. How many times have i been chilling with the Lance defending around a corner and multiple Mechs creep around....oh no even though they are at the same distance, and they're right next to each other, NOPE!! You're only locked on the one next to it...40 percent damage......DUMB AS F!

That only matters if you're too far away. In a proper scrum you get max damage regardless of target state. Maybe you'll need to adjust a bit and be a few meters closer to the corner when you defend it. Otherwise, if you're with some friends, then both groups of mechs are at equal disadvantage. Besides, if you guys are doing proper target calling and focus fire, you'll all be hitting the same targeted enemy anyway.

[DieGruneMorder]

Sader325, on 14 October 2015 - 07:26 PM, said:

It's really not that bad.

That being said, havent seen the target delay portion yet.

But as of right now, its not that bad.

Not that bad? Its bad science, its going to NERF the living F out of light and medium harassers.

[WarHippy]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

The technobabble for this one is easier than most.

Lasers rely on focusing lenses. Atmospheric distortions, lens alignment, etc., all contribute to a laser not being properly focused on the point of impact, thereby lessening the damage transfer. A target lock gives the lenses a corrected range at which to set the focus, compensating for all the variables and allowing for improved damage transfer.

Anything that would require constant adjustment like that would never function properly in a mech that bounces around every time it takes a step. Add to that these weapons are designed to fire at a specific range and would need to be consistent for military use. Outside of optimal range you would have a point, but as it stands I will have to agree with OP this change is stupid.

[Aresye]

Brb...

Gonna remap my "Target Mech" button to "Mouse 1."

[Malagant]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

The technobabble for this one is easier than most.

Lasers rely on focusing lenses. Atmospheric distortions, lens alignment, etc., all contribute to a laser not being properly focused on the point of impact, thereby lessening the damage transfer. A target lock gives the lenses a corrected range at which to set the focus, compensating for all the variables and allowing for improved damage transfer.

Sounds like smart talk except that is not how lasers work...

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Malagant, on 14 October 2015 - 07:49 PM, said:

Sounds like smart talk except that is not how lasers work...

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 14 October 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

technobabble

[Queen of England]

Malagant, on 14 October 2015 - 07:49 PM, said:

Sounds like smart talk except that is not how lasers work...

It depends on the type of laser. For example, read the description of DARPA's Excalibur phased-array laser system; it does continually adjust to adapt to range and atmospheric issues.

Edited by Queen of England, 14 October 2015 - 08:02 PM.

[Wintersdark]

I love how a high powered laser with a ridiculously short range is perfectly OK, but the whole "focus range" thing is just completely implausible.

Battletech lasers have always been ridiculous. This change doesn't make them any more ridiculous.

[Xetelian]

Aresye Kerensky, on 14 October 2015 - 07:40 PM, said:

Brb...

Gonna remap my "Target Mech" button to "Mouse 1."

Wait...it wasn't already?

I only have 2 mouse buttons, left click to target and right click to fire EVERYTHING. Nothing else is needed in this particular game.