16 replies to this topic

[Axys Rageborn]

Just curious as to why Targeting Computers don't increase lock on times for missiles and if maybe that could be a way to approach the issue with the current missile nerf/ changes.

Would this be good for the game?

I think it would be as it would then be usable for all missiles that use the lock on mechanic. It would help with all lock on missiles in some way depending on how many slots/ tonnage you are willing to sacrifice in order to have faster (all be it small %) lock on times. They could easily scale up with size and reach a max that would replicate the old Artemis lock on boost.

edit: this could also apply to the command console which would mimic the TC mk 3 lock on boost.

Edited by Axys Rageborn, 08 September 2018 - 04:39 AM.

[Asym]

OP, this discussion has been had forty times over the past few years.

ARTEMIS, targeting and sensor Skill Tree Nodes, Beagle Active Probes, AMS, Radar Dep, NARC's and ECM are all tied together, and yet, are dealt with as if they were separate entities.......... What ties them together simply isn't in the game and yet, should be,

Why would a 31 century civilization with faster-than-light travel not have integrated weapons systems? Maybe, because PGI never had military veterans on staff and they "just don't know any better?"

There are dozens of conflicting questions:

• What battlespace processor controls AMS?
  
• What is the linkage between the Skill Tree sensor nodes and ARTEMIS: are they exclusive and why?
  
• What is the relationships and effects of ECM on NARC's and all detection systems.....And, there is a counter ECM mode: it's is amazing how many don't even know that....
  
• What is the purpose of a targeting computer if it only really handles "gun type weapons".... Lasers are light speed weapons and require no "ballistic error compensation" so how does a targeting computer increase range on an unlimited range weapon?
  
• Why isn't "lead" and "elevation" for ballistic weapons visible and automatic if you have a TC?? Every modern tank in the world has this as a couple of centuries behind FTL travel....
  
• Why aren't Artillery strikes enhanced by a "targeting computer" ? that provides increased battlespace information to make ballistic and laser weapons more effective???
  
• Why wouldn't a targeting computer enhance all missiles performance since it does for ballistic and laser weapons???
  
• What actual "processor" shares target locks? Can a Mech w/o ARTEMIS share lock data? Why isn't the lock data enhanced by the Skill Tree nodes "beyond the recent nerf?" How can that be and doesn't that make the STN's just a waste of points?

The game was developed in a vacuum by people without the military skills to ask even the basic questions of combat systems integration..... I'm pretty sure the players whom consider LORE as the core of their enjoyment could better answer the historic reasons I can not.... I just a simple horse soldier.....


A good topic thought !

Edited by Asym, 08 September 2018 - 04:43 AM.

[Axys Rageborn]

Well sarna does say "The Targeting Computer can be used to help aim all direct fire weapons, including most energy and ballistic weapons."

Could this be a good way to help differentiate the gap between direct fire and in-direct fire missiles? so if the the missile carrier has LOS on the target they gain a small buff to the targeting time.

I know its out of context when it comes to lore but this is a "video game" and should have a little wriggle room.

[OmniFail]

Axys Rageborn, on 08 September 2018 - 03:55 AM, said:

Just curious as to why Targeting Computers don't increase lock on times for missiles and if maybe that could be a way to approach the issue with the current missile nerf/ changes.

Would this be good for the game?

I think it would be as it would then be usable for all missiles that use the lock on mechanic. It would help with all lock on missiles in some way depending on how many slots/ tonnage you are willing to sacrifice in order to have faster (all be it small %) lock on times. They could easily scale up with size and reach a max that would replicate the old Artemis lock on boost.

edit: this could also apply to the command console which would mimic the TC mk 3 lock on boost.

O look... Another proposed LRM tax

[Tincan Nightmare]

Asym, on 08 September 2018 - 04:39 AM, said:

OP, this discussion has been had forty times over the past few years.

ARTEMIS, targeting and sensor Skill Tree Nodes, Beagle Active Probes, AMS, Radar Dep, NARC's and ECM are all tied together, and yet, are dealt with as if they were separate entities.......... What ties them together simply isn't in the game and yet, should be,

Why would a 31 century civilization with faster-than-light travel not have integrated weapons systems? Maybe, because PGI never had military veterans on staff and they "just don't know any better?"

There are dozens of conflicting questions:

• What battlespace processor controls AMS?
  
• What is the linkage between the Skill Tree sensor nodes and ARTEMIS: are they exclusive and why?
  
• What is the relationships and effects of ECM on NARC's and all detection systems.....And, there is a counter ECM mode: it's is amazing how many don't even know that....
  
• What is the purpose of a targeting computer if it only really handles "gun type weapons".... Lasers are light speed weapons and require no "ballistic error compensation" so how does a targeting computer increase range on an unlimited range weapon?
  
• Why isn't "lead" and "elevation" for ballistic weapons visible and automatic if you have a TC?? Every modern tank in the world has this as a couple of centuries behind FTL travel....
  
• Why aren't Artillery strikes enhanced by a "targeting computer" ? that provides increased battlespace information to make ballistic and laser weapons more effective???
  
• Why wouldn't a targeting computer enhance all missiles performance since it does for ballistic and laser weapons???
  
• What actual "processor" shares target locks? Can a Mech w/o ARTEMIS share lock data? Why isn't the lock data enhanced by the Skill Tree nodes "beyond the recent nerf?" How can that be and doesn't that make the STN's just a waste of points?

The game was developed in a vacuum by people without the military skills to ask even the basic questions of combat systems integration..... I'm pretty sure the players whom consider LORE as the core of their enjoyment could better answer the historic reasons I can not.... I just a simple horse soldier.....



A good topic thought !

Well honestly it goes to the Tabletop origins of this franchise, and that it came out in the early 80's, so that much of what has been developed in modern military tech and the digital age was mostly in it's infancy. On top of that, there is the whole 'lost technology' setting of the universe, where high tech items were nearly irreplaceable. Granted, that still makes you scratch your head when, as you state, technology that is common for us (as a supposedly less advanced society in the ancient past) can perform better than the 'futuristic high tech' equipment of the BT universe. I always just put it down into the limitations of converting a setting from real life into something that will fit comfortably on a table top playing surface, and vice versa.

[Axys Rageborn]

OmniFail, on 08 September 2018 - 12:08 PM, said:

O look... Another proposed LRM tax

How is this a tax? I am suggesting a return of functionality a cost of slots and tonnage. You can gain back what u lost by sacrificing some ammo to put in a TC.

It's called a choice....

[Zibmo]

Axys Rageborn, on 08 September 2018 - 01:32 PM, said:

How is this a tax? I am suggesting a return of functionality a cost of slots and tonnage. You can gain back what u lost by sacrificing some ammo to put in a TC.

It's called a choice....

You accidentally said "increase time to acquire a lock" or something to that effect. I think you meant "keep locks longer", but it could be interpreted to mean "make it take longer to lock on to a target."

Edited by Zibmo, 08 September 2018 - 02:33 PM.

[Axys Rageborn]

What I meant was for the targeting computers to get a missile lock on boost % based on the size of TC. that way you could choose whether or not u drop some tonnage / slots to get faster locks with all missiles that use the mechanic.

It would essentially be a buff like how it works for ACs and Lazors. Would be a cool way of giving back what was lost and make it relevant to all missiles that have to lock on.

Sorry for confusion as I don't want to hurt LRMs more just want to see if this idea is something people would want as it adds depth while giving a choice on loadouts.

Edited by Axys Rageborn, 08 September 2018 - 04:15 PM.

[Asym]

Tincan Nightmare, on 08 September 2018 - 12:19 PM, said:

Well honestly it goes to the Tabletop origins of this franchise, and that it came out in the early 80's, so that much of what has been developed in modern military tech and the digital age was mostly in it's infancy. On top of that, there is the whole 'lost technology' setting of the universe, where high tech items were nearly irreplaceable. Granted, that still makes you scratch your head when, as you state, technology that is common for us (as a supposedly less advanced society in the ancient past) can perform better than the 'futuristic high tech' equipment of the BT universe. I always just put it down into the limitations of converting a setting from real life into something that will fit comfortably on a table top playing surface, and vice versa.

I always assume the BT and lore are the origins of the inconsistencies and out right illogical technology. The fire control technologies I've alluded to have existed since the later 1960's......so, either they've intentionally messed with logical assumptions or they really have no clue about what they are doing.... I'm leaning on the later......

At this point, I'm not sure it matters anymore. Thanks for the reply....

[MitchellAvellar]

Well, it would appear they "sort of" took your advice here in a way. The TC gives extended sensor range and target lock time is now tied to your range to the target relative to your max sensor range or some such. I'm guessing that means that a targeting computer will now give you slightly faster lock times, not sure. Anyone know for sure if this is true?

[Aidan Crenshaw]

That would be the right conclusion, i guess.

[justcallme A S H]

Axys Rageborn, on 08 September 2018 - 03:55 AM, said:

Just curious as to why Targeting Computers don't increase lock on times for missiles and if maybe that could be a way to approach the issue with the current missile nerf/ changes.

Would this be good for the game?

I think it would be as it would then be usable for all missiles that use the lock on mechanic. It would help with all lock on missiles in some way depending on how many slots/ tonnage you are willing to sacrifice in order to have faster (all be it small %) lock on times. They could easily scale up with size and reach a max that would replicate the old Artemis lock on boost.

edit: this could also apply to the command console which would mimic the TC mk 3 lock on boost.

Go read patch notes.

The longer your max sensor range the better your lock speed over X distance.

Thus TCs already help with it. Granted not a lot, but they help (where previously they never did)

Edited by justcallme A S H, 16 April 2019 - 10:43 PM.

[Axys Rageborn]

justcallme A S H, on 16 April 2019 - 10:40 PM, said:

Go read patch notes.

The longer your max sensor range the better your lock speed over X distance.

Thus TCs already help with it. Granted not a lot, but they help (where previously they never did)

This was from last year, so maybe you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Honestly I forgot I had even wrote this haha.

Edited by Axys Rageborn, 16 April 2019 - 11:00 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

Wait someone necro'd a thread about lock time?

Oh well - my posts stands. TC help with lock time now for IDF.

[HammerMaster]

justcallme A S H, on 17 April 2019 - 02:00 AM, said:

Wait someone necro'd a thread about lock time?

Oh well - my posts stands. TC help with lock time now for IDF.

Really?
Do we have any numbers on this?
Yes I know notes but I'm off grid.

Edited by HammerMaster, 17 April 2019 - 04:53 AM.

[Feral Clown]

Asym, on 08 September 2018 - 04:39 AM, said:

OP, this discussion has been had forty times over the past few years.

ARTEMIS, targeting and sensor Skill Tree Nodes, Beagle Active Probes, AMS, Radar Dep, NARC's and ECM are all tied together, and yet, are dealt with as if they were separate entities..........  What ties them together simply isn't in the game and yet, should be,

Why would a 31 century civilization with faster-than-light travel not have integrated weapons systems?  Maybe, because PGI never had military veterans on staff and they "just don't know any better?"

There are dozens of conflicting questions:

• What battlespace processor controls AMS?
  
• What is the linkage between the Skill Tree sensor nodes and ARTEMIS: are they exclusive and why?
  
• What is the relationships and effects of ECM on NARC's and all detection systems.....And, there is a counter ECM mode: it's is amazing how many don't even know that....
  
• What is the purpose of a targeting computer if it only really handles "gun type weapons"....  Lasers are light speed weapons and require no "ballistic error compensation" so how does a targeting computer increase range on an unlimited range weapon?
  
• Why isn't "lead" and "elevation" for ballistic weapons visible and automatic if you have a TC??  Every modern tank in the world has this as a couple of centuries behind FTL travel....
  
• Why aren't Artillery strikes enhanced by a "targeting computer" ?  that provides increased battlespace information to make ballistic and laser weapons more effective???
  
• Why wouldn't a targeting computer enhance all missiles performance since it does for ballistic and laser weapons???
  
• What actual "processor" shares target locks?  Can a Mech w/o ARTEMIS share lock data?  Why isn't the lock data enhanced by the Skill Tree nodes "beyond the recent nerf?"  How can that be and doesn't that make the STN's just a waste of points?

The game was developed in a vacuum by people without the military skills to ask even the basic questions of combat systems integration.....  I'm pretty sure the players whom consider LORE as the core of their enjoyment could better answer the historic reasons I can not....  I just a simple horse soldier.....


A good topic thought !

First I appreciate the service and sacrifice vets make for their country. That said in a game based on a fictional universe with little to nothing to do with reality, not having vets on staff isn't something I'd hold against PGI. Some games it makes sense but in a giant robot game where physics are out the window to begin with,it doesn't.

[Neuromancerx]

Axys Rageborn, on 16 April 2019 - 10:53 PM, said:

This was from last year, so maybe you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Honestly I forgot I had even wrote this haha.

HAHAHAHAHAHA.

Why necro a thread you said was necro'd, if you have nothing to add.

LOLOLOLOL?
Were you drunk, stoned, or just being a jerk.