97 replies to this topic

[Strum Wealh]

DAYLEET, on 09 January 2016 - 10:46 PM, said:

Is that a Lore thing or your wish? I think "would likely be" answers my question...

It would actually be a canon/lore element.

• The Short-Range Scanner Sweep "provides a MechWarrior with a two-kilometer sweep". (CBT Companion, pg. 237)
  
• The Long-Range Sensor Sweep "shows a 32 square kilometer map [a circle of radius 3.19 kilometers], usually relayed to the battle computer from satellites", and "enemy 'Mechs are usually displayed as well, but no detail can be obtained unless they are within two kilometers of the scanning 'Mech". (CBT Companion, pg. 237)
  
• Standard Jamming Gear "enables a MechWarrior to jam communications up to two kilometers away against any BattleMech currently targeted on the primary viewing screen". (CBT Companion, pg. 239)
  
• Communications equipment is capable of "direct point-to-point operational ranges (without bouncing) averaging 50 kilometers on the ground". (TechManual, pg. 212)
  
• The searchlight "can light up targets as far away as five kilometers". (TechManual, pg. 237)

By contrast, the MW games generally limited sensor range to one kilometer.

Aside from that, the sensor rules in Tactical Operations (specifically, the Sensor Ranges Table on page 222) state that basic 'Mech Radar has a range of 720 meters (24 hexes) with no special effects from the target (outside of the presence of Stealth Armor, ECM, Null Sig, or CLPS), Beagle has a range of 1080 meters (36 hexes) and also experiences no special effects from the target (outside of the presence of Stealth Armor, ECM, Null Sig, or CLPS), while the other sensor types do experience special effects based on the target type - IR (900 meters/30 hexes) cannot detect targets that are not "hot", seismic (180 meters/6 hexes) cannot detect targets that are stationary or airborne or submerged, and MagScan (900 meters/30 hexes) cannot detect targets below 20 tons or occupying a Heavy Industrial Zone hex.
Of those, only MagScan is affected by target size - "for any unit from 80 to 100 tons, the range of the sensor is expanded for that unit(s) alone by 1 hex" and "nits that weigh less than 20 tons cannot be detected by a magscan sensor, including all infantry".

Also, 'Mech Radar cannot see through terrain (Hill Hexes) or through structures (Building Hexes & Castle Brian Hexes) - the effect is "if along LOS, sensor completely blocked". Also, lots of ground clutter (Heavy Woods/Jungle Hexes & Ultra Woods/Jungle Hexes) would reduce the effectiveness of 'Mech Radar (–1 or -2 hexes per range bracket per hex in LOS).

But, a stock LCT-1V Locust and a stock Daishi Prime at the same distance on a flat, featureless map would show up equally well on 'Mech Radar.
(And, if they were at the same point on the Heat Scale, both would show up equally well on IR. But, the Daishi's being over 80 tons would mean that it would show up a bit further out on MagScan (930 meters/31 hexes, versus 900 meters/30 hexes).)

[Mystere]

Davers, on 09 January 2016 - 11:35 PM, said:

But it's the 'perfect convergence' of lasers that is the issue, much more than ACs or PPCs which seemed to be 'fixed' by velocity adjustments.

I disagree. Why else would we have ghost heat for non-laser weapons? Mass-fired PPCs were the trigger for that mechanic more than anything else.

Also, gauss rifles are a good example on the ballistic side. Why else would there be a maximum limit on how many of them can be fired?

Edited by Mystere, 09 January 2016 - 11:55 PM.

[Davers]

Mystere, on 09 January 2016 - 11:51 PM, said:

I disagree. Why else would we have ghost heat for non-laser weapons? Massed-fired PPCs were the trigger for that mechanic more than anything else.

Also, gauss rifles are a good example on the ballistic side. Why else would there be a maximum limit on how many of them can be fired?

How many PPCs do you see lately? There was a time when every mech had 2. A few tweaks to heat and velocity and they all but disappeared from the game.

And mechs with 3-4 GRs would ruin the game. Even if there was some convergence mechanic, I am not sure I would want that to really be a viable build.

[Mystere]

Davers, on 09 January 2016 - 11:59 PM, said:

How many PPCs do you see lately? There was a time when every mech had 2. A few tweaks to heat and velocity and they all but disappeared from the game.

You say tweaks, I say gigantic nerf hammering.

Davers, on 09 January 2016 - 11:59 PM, said:

And mechs with 3-4 GRs would ruin the game. Even if there was some convergence mechanic, I am not sure I would want that to really be a viable build.

And my opinion is I won't mind such builds.

[jss78]

I've also been saddened by how the infotech just disappeared.

Sure, drop the laser "ghost range" thing, but what about everything else we had there? It wasn't perfect, but it was a hell of a big improvement over the current system, where sensors have this strange binary behaviour: perfect functioning at 799 m, and then none whatsoever at 801 m. It makes no sense.

We really need a system where target acquisition -- whether it's achieved at all, or if it is, how quickly -- is cumulatively affected by range, number of mechs running sensors, quality of said sensors, amount of ECM, amount of counter-ECM, and the radar profile of the target. The PTS was a good attempt at that. Really sad if it's just lost.

[STEF_]

Alistair Winter, on 09 January 2016 - 08:29 PM, said:

So I guess the response is:

• Nobody knows
  
• The first attempt by PGI to add more complexity in gameplay since 2013 was shot down

That's... disappoint.

Where did u read the second one?

I saw these two:
- Nobody knows
- PGI incompetence created a new "crazy and weird" infotech system

[Alistair Winter]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 January 2016 - 12:12 AM, said:

Where did u read the second one?

I saw these two:
- Nobody knows
- PGI incompetence created a new "crazy and weird" infotech system

My version is the only one that is objectively true though.

Crazy and weird, I don't get. Different units having different degrees of radar strength and being easier or harder to detect doesn't seem crazy and weird to me.

[McValium]

Pretty sure they didnt much in therms of development of new stuff around december/januar due to holidays and steam release. i would expect more pts in february

[STEF_]

Alistair Winter, on 10 January 2016 - 03:43 AM, said:

My version is the only one that is objectively true though.

Crazy and weird, I don't get. Different units having different degrees of radar strength and being easier or harder to detect doesn't seem crazy and weird to me.

Have you tested it?

I did. The fact of nerf dmg without lock may appear good in theory but kinda dumb in practice.
I dropped with a CN9-AL, testing 4ml or 4mpl, various loadouts.
The sad thing is that with "hit and hide" tactic (which is normal survive tactic, nothing special) I could do quite no dmg at 250+ metres. If I tried to lock, that time was enought to be cored.

So, if we remove the "ghost nerf" because it does not work, then the so called infotech is really pointless, because eye visual and firing without lock.

jss78, on 10 January 2016 - 12:07 AM, said:

I've also been saddened by how the infotech just disappeared.

Sure, drop the laser "ghost range" thing, but what about everything else we had there? It wasn't perfect, but it was a hell of a big improvement over the current system, where sensors have this strange binary behaviour: perfect functioning at 799 m, and then none whatsoever at 801 m. It makes no sense.

if you drop the "laser ghost range thing", then which is the point of infotech, if you can see with your eyes, aim, shoot and kill without locking the target?

[DoctorDetroit]

PTS version of info tech was not well thought out. Assault mechs shouldnt have worse sensors than light mechs. They should focus on mech size and profile for detection. Lights would have less profile and wouldnt get detected at longer ranges. Also, give them a better use of ECM coverage. As mechs get bigger they are detected at longer ranges and less benefit from ECM.

[DoctorDetroit]

Alistair Winter, on 10 January 2016 - 03:43 AM, said:

My version is the only one that is objectively true though.

Crazy and weird, I don't get. Different units having different degrees of radar strength and being easier or harder to detect doesn't seem crazy and weird to me.

I am sorry but Dire Wolves having crappy radar makes NO sense. Why would anyone invest that much money into a war machine and not give it atleast the sensor package that the light, cheap, expendable mechs get. In fact the opposite is true, where larger mechs would be more likely to be worth the investment of much better sensors than lights or mediums.

You are correct about larger mech profiles being more detdctable

[Alistair Winter]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 January 2016 - 05:39 AM, said:

Have you tested it?
I did. The fact of nerf dmg without lock may appear good in theory but kinda dumb in practice.
I dropped with a CN9-AL, testing 4ml or 4mpl, various loadouts.
The sad thing is that with "hit and hide" tactic (which is normal survive tactic, nothing special) I could do quite no dmg at 250+ metres. If I tried to lock, that time was enought to be cored.
So, if we remove the "ghost nerf" because it does not work, then the so called infotech is really pointless, because eye visual and firing without lock.
if you drop the "laser ghost range thing", then which is the point of infotech, if you can see with your eyes, aim, shoot and kill without locking the target?

We're not talking about the lasers being affected by target lock. We're talking about Infotech. It's obviously not pointless, unless you're one of the people who never presses the R button. Not to mention that there are many maps where it's difficult to identify the exact number of enemy mechs on the screen, especially when you're moving at high speeds and looking through buildings, trees, etc.

It's obviously not going to play a bigger effect than all other factors, but it's not intended to do that either. It's a small feature that contributes to complexity and helps nudge the balance in the right direction.

DoctorDetroit, on 10 January 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

I am sorry but Dire Wolves having crappy radar makes NO sense. Why would anyone invest that much money into a war machine and not give it atleast the sensor package that the light, cheap, expendable mechs get. In fact the opposite is true, where larger mechs would be more likely to be worth the investment of much better sensors than lights or mediums.
You are correct about larger mech profiles being more detdctable

Because role warfare. "Crappy radar" is relative. A support mech having "crappy radar" relative to a scout makes perfect sense. The scout is supposed to do the scouting.

At some point, people have to realize two things:

• This is not supposed to be consistent with lore and realism in every fashion. If it was, the Dire Wolf would be king and everyone else would be its fodder. It would be a tech race to the best weapons and the best mech, and then the endgame would be Dire wolves. Light mechs and medium mechs would not be tiny, they would be slightly shorter and slimmer than heavies and assaults, but very easy targets. This is not that game. Changes have been made to avoid the Dire wolf being overpowered.
  
• PGI isn't going to rebuild the game from scratch. Some things are here to stay. Does it make sense that an LBX on a Centurion is almost twice as good as an LBX of the same size on an assault make? Not necessarily, no. But I'll just accept some of these tweaks for the sake of balance and role warfare.

[Triordinant]

When is infotech going live?

[Khobai]

Quote

I disagree. Why else would we have ghost heat for non-laser weapons? Mass-fired PPCs were the trigger for that mechanic more than anything else.

laser vomit is WAY more powerful than mass-fired PPCs ever were.

The 4 PPC stalker was pretty much the most threatening PPC build... and it was limited to 40 damage (but often youd never do 40 damage because of hit detection issues with multiple PPCs). And it was projectile damage too so you still had to aim and hit. PPCs also generated way more heat per damage compared to lasers. And you had a 90m min range where you couldnt do any damage.

Laser vomit can unload 50+ damage from 700m away. Its hitscan damage too. So its easymode to hit with compared to projectile weapons. And you get much better heat efficiency. No min range either.

Clan lasers and IS laser quirks both need massive nerfs.

Quote

If it was, the Dire Wolf would be king and everyone else would be its fodder

The Dire Wolf, as well assault mechs in general, should be kings of the battlefield though. Thats one of the big problems with the game right now. Assault mechs are just bad because theyre slow and arnt properly compensated with superior firepower and durability. Plus hillclimbing is completely screwed up for assaults. Spawn point locations are screwed up for assaults too. As a result of all that, heavy mechs end up being outright better than assaults, and taking an assault is actually a liability for your team most of the time.

Quote

Does it make sense that an LBX on a Centurion is almost twice as good as an LBX of the same size on an assault make?

Yeah your point about weapon quirks is entirely valid. weapon quirks should not be used to balance clan vs IS tech. The weapons should be balanced at the base level without quirks.

The whole point of quirks is to help underpowered mechs and differentiate similar mechs. Thats all quirks shouldve ever been used for.

Edited by Khobai, 10 January 2016 - 07:25 AM.

[Pjwned]

MechaBattler, on 09 January 2016 - 11:01 PM, said:

Seemed like they had the mechanics in place during the PTS. People complained loudly. And PGI chose not to risk the Steam release. Doesn't sound too incompetent. Especially as Steam release went well.

I guess they shouldn't listen to the player-base. Like they're always accused of doing.

Dropping everything that made the "great mech re-balance" actually accomplish anything in favor of rushing the game out to Steam is not something to praise PGI for. If it was going to be such a huge waste of time, which it was, then PGI should've worked on something else until they got their **** together and actually figured out what to do to not make quirks an unbalanced, sloppy mess like they continue to be now.

Davers, on 09 January 2016 - 11:01 PM, said:

People keep bringing up convergence despite PGI's statement that they couldn't get it to work with HSR. Their version of IW was an attempt to simulate convergence, and no one seemed to like it. I wonder who those 'someones' were, since 1. there are many complaints about the 'laser meta' (which this directly addressed) and 2. PGI is using tonnage as part of their balance, it makes no sense to allow the lightest of weapons to be superior in most cases to heavier ACs and missiles,

The issue was always delayed convergence not working properly with HSR.

There are alternative solutions to convergence that still use the same instant convergence we have now.

[MechaBattler]

Pjwned, on 10 January 2016 - 08:25 AM, said:

Dropping everything that made the "great mech re-balance" actually accomplish anything in favor of rushing the game out to Steam is not something to praise PGI for. If it was going to be such a huge waste of time, which it was, then PGI should've worked on something else until they got their **** together and actually figured out what to do to not make quirks an unbalanced, sloppy mess like they continue to be now.



The issue was always delayed convergence not working properly with HSR.

There are alternative solutions to convergence that still use the same instant convergence we have now.

Well I guess that's your opinion. I do want to see the changes. But I can understand why they did what they did.

[jss78]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 January 2016 - 05:39 AM, said:

if you drop the "laser ghost range thing", then which is the point of infotech, if you can see with your eyes, aim, shoot and kill without locking the target?

Doesn't that still leave all the usual benefits of target locking: letting friendlies know where the enemies are, identifying exposed components, missile locks. We advise new people to hit "R" all the time, while we don't have the ghost range mechanic.

All I'm saying is that I'd prefer a system to where the ability and delay to obtain lock and get target information (paper doll) depends cumulatively on several factors such as the strength of sensors, # of friendly mechs having LOS to target, range to target, amount of ECM and counter ECM, and the target's radar signature. Make it really slow or potentially impossible if it's a tiny mech at a long distance and if ECM is present. Very quick locks if it's a big target being scanned from close range by mechs with exceptional targetting equipment.

The PTS took steps towards that direction, and I liked that. It probably wouldn't be a game changer either way, and wouldn't be a big factor in mech-to-mech balancing. But it'd make more sense than the current system where our sensors work perfectly out to 800 m but don't do anything at 801 m.

Edited by jss78, 10 January 2016 - 09:36 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

Xetelian, on 09 January 2016 - 07:39 PM, said:

No thank you. Making ECM just a minor annoyance would be too much of a buff to LRMs.
The different radar ranges would probably be a heavy nerf to bigger LRM mechs. I don't think this balances out with the ECM changes at all.


I don't think it makes sense that a DWF would have less radar range than an ACH, if I read the changes correctly, I don't believe that bigger mechs would have crappy radar while little mechs have supreme range.

While I don't think that makes sense I can totally understand the ideas backing the initial changes. Putting light mechs into a better role would be very good. Won't make them any more popular to pilot in a game based around how much damage you do during a match.

Currently there is always someone oustide of "the bubble" and they aren't instant killed. The lock mechanic needs a change, though, and then the flight speed of missiles can be changed as well.

As for radar range: it isn't depending on size. However, according to lore, many of the light and medium mechs had better sensor suits because it simply was their job to point the fatties to the targets. There were exceptions of course like the Rifleman and Jagermech because they were intended as anti-aircraft mechs and needed very good sensors to detect threats from above very earily and quickly.
This would also be a chance to indivualize mechs and grant the ones with weaker firepower a minor compensation which doesn't help to lower the TTK any further

Imo light and medium mechs should therefore get a small buff in sensor range. There should also be a short delay when you show up on the radar depending on your size. That would grant small and medium mechs some reprive from those huge alphas a heavy or assault can fling.

As for ECM...currently ECM is a joke. It is a hardlock for a radar lock. Which is plainly stupid. It should grant some lock and radar detection delay and that's it

[Pjwned]

MechaBattler, on 10 January 2016 - 09:26 AM, said:

Well I guess that's your opinion. I do want to see the changes. But I can understand why they did what they did.

I understand as well why they did it, and it's because of incompetence.

[pbiggz]

The key to info warfare, whatever it might shape up to be, is the mechanics have to be clearly defined and easy to see and understand in action. If the info tech rules are all implicit and subtle and the only way you can understand WHY that locust can see you when the atlas cant is by reading a document on the forums then already, the implementation fails.