235 replies to this topic

[Deathz Jester]

Airwind, on 10 January 2014 - 09:34 PM, said:

These kind of lore should have came from pgi. Nicely done.

All mechs in mwo are light, medium, heavy and assault. There is no lore for them.

well they're too busy with artificial fluff and "working"

[DrSlamastika]

Whats mean "Targeting computer" in right torso on WARHAWK??? Another super fancy new modul or whats supposed to be this thing???

[Strum Wealh]

DrSlamastika, on 13 February 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

Whats mean "Targeting computer" in right torso on WARHAWK??? Another super fancy new modul or whats supposed to be this thing???

The Targeting Computer is an equipment item that dramatically increased weapon accuracy(which was represented in the BattleTech tabletop game, by bonuses to the to-hit roll and the ability to make aimed shots against moving targets).
(For additional details, see the BattleTech rulebooks.)

It appeared in MechWarrior 3, and equipping it allowed the player to target specific sections of an opposing 'Mech, in addition to providing a lead indicator.

In BattleTech, the Targeting Computer is "fixed equipment" on the Masakari; it is present in the Right Torso of each and every variant, and the background of the 'Mech states, "The 'Mech carries an advanced targeting computer, which apparently comes as standard equipment in all configurations. Though the computer must be modified for different weapons arrays, the basic computing boards appear to be built into the OmniMech's frame."

PGI has indicated (in this post) that they currently intend to honor the BT rules for fixed equipment on OmniMechs; it will be interesting to see how they address the issue of the Masakari's Targeting Computer (especially if/how it would be changing tonnage as loadout changes)...

[Deathz Jester]

Strum Wealh, on 13 February 2014 - 04:12 PM, said:

The Targeting Computer is an equipment item that dramatically increased weapon accuracy(which was represented in the BattleTech tabletop game, by bonuses to the to-hit roll and the ability to make aimed shots against moving targets).
(For additional details, see the BattleTech rulebooks.)

It appeared in MechWarrior 3, and equipping it allowed the player to target specific sections of an opposing 'Mech, in addition to providing a lead indicator.

In BattleTech, the Targeting Computer is "fixed equipment" on the Masakari; it is present in the Right Torso of each and every variant, and the background of the 'Mech states, "The 'Mech carries an advanced targeting computer, which apparently comes as standard equipment in all configurations. Though the computer must be modified for different weapons arrays, the basic computing boards appear to be built into the OmniMech's frame."

PGI has indicated (in this post) that they currently intend to honor the BT rules for fixed equipment on OmniMechs; it will be interesting to see how they address the issue of the Masakari's Targeting Computer (especially if/how it would be changing tonnage as loadout changes)...

Only question on my mind though is, what is the purpose of a "targeting" computer when we have instant/pinpoint weapon targeting/convergence? We apparently already have them.

[zudukai]

lead indicator?

[CoffiNail]

zudukai, on 19 February 2014 - 03:16 AM, said:

lead indicator?

It is a extra reticle that calculates the place you need to aim for the weapon to hit accurately. ie: using a AC/20 or PPC. Because of the slower projectile it is 'harder' to hit, the lead indicator will show you where you need to shoot so that by the time the projectile spans the distance it will hit on target.

[Pariah Devalis]

Which would be the more dramatic of the two acceptable ideas that come to my mind for TarComp implementation. Lead reticule for center of mass based on slowest projectile weapon OR instead of setting weapon convergence on whatever your reticule is hovering over, it would set it to the distance of your currently selected target. The second option is extremely subtle, but can make a big difference when it comes to leading small, fast targets like Spiders.

[Nean]

So, it's unknown when clan tech comes out eh? I hope they balance it, otherwise inner sphere would get wrecked

[GizmoGecko]

Nean, on 01 March 2014 - 04:52 PM, said:

So, it's unknown when clan tech comes out eh? I hope they balance it, otherwise inner sphere would get wrecked

June 17th http://www.mwomercs.com/clans

[Kael Posavatz]

Strum Wealh, you are referring to the Warhawk, quiaff?

The targeting computer is not 'fixed equipment'. If it was it would place an undue burden upon what weapons could be carried for the mass of the targeting computer is in proportion to the mass of the weapons linked to it.

This having been said, the Warhawk is notable for all of standard configurations mounting a targeting computer. That does not mean, however, that it is fixed.

[Strum Wealh]

Kael 17, on 05 May 2014 - 06:26 AM, said:

Strum Wealh, you are referring to the Warhawk, quiaff?

The targeting computer is not 'fixed equipment'. If it was it would place an undue burden upon what weapons could be carried for the mass of the targeting computer is in proportion to the mass of the weapons linked to it.

This having been said, the Warhawk is notable for all of standard configurations mounting a targeting computer. That does not mean, however, that it is fixed.

The TC on the Masakari is indeed "fixed equipment" (unlike the pod-mounted TC on the Puma Prime); the variable weight of the TC is explained in the TROs as having modular components added to or removed from the fixed TC elements built into the Masakari's frame.

The "undue burden" (which, frankly, isn't much of one, considering the benefits granted ) is part of the point of having the Masakari's TC as fixed equipment in the first place - TT-designed OmniMechs were deliberately designed with integrated "flaws" (which were enforced by having the fixed equipment rules in the first place) in order to keep their gameplay power in check; not every OmniMech was meant to be a hyper-optimized monstrosity.

In the Masakari, this "flaw" takes the form of the increasing weight & space requirements of the TC placing a cap on the number of heavy weapons that can be used to fill the pod space, and is part of what eventually sets it apart from other OmniMechs within the same weight bracket (such as the later Savage Coyote, Deimos and Templar - each of which has their own issues).

Edited by Strum Wealh, 05 May 2014 - 09:06 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Interestingly, I heard it both ways. I heard the TC is hardwired AND I heard the required inputs for the TC is the hardwired part and not the TC itself. Considering the mech has 20 hardwired DHS, it could go either way, but it would be nice to have clarification.

[NeoCodex]

Question regarding the OP: When does the IS see the Kodiak (since production years are, well.. rather confusing), or does it ever? Is there any chance we might see this 'Mech in MWO based from the lore; was it present in the invasions at all?

If we are currently in 3051, I actually found information that it was indeed present in the Invasions (3050 - 3061), so is there hope we'll be seeing one in the near future?

Edited by NeoCodex, 04 June 2014 - 04:34 AM.

[FallenFactol]

NeoCodex, on 04 June 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

Question regarding the OP: When does the IS see the Kodiak (since production years are, well.. rather confusing), or does it ever? Is there any chance we might see this 'Mech in MWO based from the lore; was it present in the invasions at all?

If we are currently in 3051, I actually found information that it was indeed present in the Invasions (3050 - 3061), so is there hope we'll be seeing one in the near future?

The time line is getting reset back to 3049.

[Strum Wealh]

NeoCodex, on 04 June 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

Question regarding the OP: When does the IS see the Kodiak (since production years are, well.. rather confusing), or does it ever? Is there any chance we might see this 'Mech in MWO based from the lore; was it present in the invasions at all?

If we are currently in 3051, I actually found information that it was indeed present in the Invasions (3050 - 3061), so is there hope we'll be seeing one in the near future?

The thing about the Kodiak is that it is a "standard" BattleMech (that is, not an OmniMech) where the first variant was created in 3001, the second time-wise variant (which was linked in the quoted post) is created in 3052, and the third time-wise variant (needed to work in MWO's XP system) is created in 3062 and "first appeared during the Dominion-Combine War, when it received its baptism of fire on Richmond".

Aside from the timeline issue, there is also a set of game balance issues to come with having "standard" BattleMechs (with their customizable structure, engines, and so on) with access to Clan tech - a set of issues that PGI ostensibly attempted to avoid by using the canonical OmniMech restrictions in the first place (instead of letting OmniMechs customize their internals, as with previous MW titles).
So, it is possible that we might not see Clan non-OmniTech 'Mechs for some time... if ever.

[Pariah Devalis]

If only they would restrict construction rules for standard battlemechs (both IS and Clan) more closely. Engine and Internal structure should really be locked....

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 04 June 2014 - 07:47 AM.

[CoffiNail]

I know, eh pariah? The omnimech was designed to compute the weight change and distribution in the gyro. It is why the Omni can transport elementals and std Battletech could not.

As for Kodiak. It is in production in the homeworlds but it was rarely sighted in the inner sphere. When it was, it was a commanders Mech for a garrison unit.

[NeoCodex]

That's a shame. I just cannot stop thinking how cool it would be to see it in action. But thanks for the detailed explanations!

[CoffiNail]

NeoCodex, on 04 June 2014 - 10:47 PM, said:

That's a shame. I just cannot stop thinking how cool it would be to see it in action. But thanks for the detailed explanations!

Brother, look at my signature and my avatar. I very much feel your pain. I hope they do add the Kodiak at some point, preferably soon.

Edited by CoffiNail, 07 June 2014 - 04:59 AM.

[101011]

Aff. I hope that PGI eventually gets rid of that 3 chassis requirement, because it really holds back some cool stuff.