26 replies to this topic

[ManDaisy]

Should missiles simply explode at their maximum range if they do not hit their target or should they continue on their fight path without the ability to correct their angle? At what point in a missiles range does it run out of fuel and becomes forced to glide only?

Note:
Gliding missiles will allow for Extended Long Range for both LRMs and SRMs where as they turn into more of a rocket type.

One should make not that gravity will eventually pull a missile into the ground.

Edited by ManDaisy, 27 February 2012 - 01:53 PM.

[osito]

I dont like the idea of a unending glide. there should be a drop off until they hit the ground and explode. I know after fuel runs out the missles will glide further out but not that far they will lose altitude and slam into the ground if they dont hit something.

[Win44]

I voted explode at end of fuel load.

Gliding missles make some sense for LRMS that launch with a elevated flight path, less so with SRMs that have a flat trajectory.

Ultimately I want my missles to blow up before dropping to the ground uselessly.

[MaddMaxx]

Would they have potential damage upon explosion at maximum range? If so, they could be used as AoE weapons...

Edited by MaddMaxx, 27 February 2012 - 11:47 AM.

[Risky]

I like to see them drift after running out of fuel, past max range. Gives the feeling that you're never safe, even from a stray missile.

[Kelthar]

Given the lack of real range on LRMs they probably flame out not far from the launcher.

[Insidious Johnson]

With all the "information warfare" hype, guided missle behavior should be erratic for some percentage affected by "counter" equipment. Especially IS manufactured missiles. As quality of missiles and counters grow together, better missiles would have multiple chances to acquire a target after a singular "defeat." This would mean missiles launced at a mech with every glorious electronic counter would lose lock, then try to reacquire along the path of least resistance. If another enemy mech(s) is less than 150m away and possesses less counters, the missiles might lock on to the easier target.

Also, there would be duds. This is IS tech and starting tech should be the worst. Manufacturing, shipping, handling, and loading should all contribute to the possibility of "dud" in some form of obvious failure. Loss of guidance ( they become deadfire projectiles ), loss of proximity detection ( blowing up a few meters before OR after hitting ), or just pure failure to detonate at all should become factors. There should be various grades of the same ammunition with costs tied to "expected" performance level. You want "Randomness" in MWO? Guided missiles vs missile counters should do the trick. Turning on your ecm or other counters should make your friends without them want to stand very far away from you. Missiles want to lock onto something, if they can. ALL of the above options should be seen as some percentage of behavior.

Edited by Insidious Johnson, 27 February 2012 - 12:04 PM.

[Joseph Calvert]

I'd like to see a little bit of a glide after max range. That would make the most sense.

[El Loco]

I have no idea whatsoever about the mechanics of a missile, but I think once they run out of fuel they'll enter a less stable trajectory and start spinning. It therefore might be possible that a missile can stay airborn beyond max range, but not for too long. I don't know if it's easy to implement into the game, though.

[Win44]

Insidious Johnson, on 27 February 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

With all the "information warfare" hype, guided missle behavior should be erratic for some percentage affected by "counter" equipment. Especially IS manufactured missiles. As quality of missiles and counters grow together, better missiles would have multiple chances to acquire a target after a singular "defeat." This would mean missiles launced at a mech with every glorious electronic counter would lose lock, then try to reacquire along the path of least resistance. If another enemy mech(s) is less than 150m away and possesses less counters, the missiles might lock on to the easier target.

Also, there would be duds. This is IS tech and starting tech should be the worst. Manufacturing, shipping, handling, and loading should all contribute to the possibility of "dud" in some form of obvious failure. Loss of guidance ( they become deadfire projectiles ), loss of proximity detection ( blowing up a few meters before OR after hitting ), or just pure failure to detonate at all should become factors. There should be various grades of the same ammunition with costs tied to "expected" performance level. You want "Randomness" in MWO? Guided missiles vs missile counters should do the trick. Turning on your ecm or other counters should make your friends without them want to stand very far away from you. Missiles want to lock onto something, if they can. ALL of the above options should be seen as some percentage of behavior.

Huh?

That's an amazingly true to life game concept you have there.

I also cant imagine a game mechanic that would make me want to stab myself in the eye more than the possibility of my weapons having a chance to fail randomly.

[Nathanel Ghent]

well, in my opinion the maximum range is where a missile hits the ground because it's run out of fuel and gravity is a *****.
so an explosion at the end, but on the ground.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Max range is really max effective range. For missiles that would be max powered flight and guidance (if applicable) After that they should have a ballistic flight until they hit the ground.

However if they do this, they really need to open up extended ranges for all weapons.

[Insidious Johnson]

Win44, on 27 February 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

Huh?

That's an amazingly true to life game concept you have there.

I also cant imagine a game mechanic that would make me want to stab myself in the eye more than the possibility of my weapons having a chance to fail randomly.

I understand, completely. I've been in shipping and in the army. I've seen how inappropriate handling and safety measures have an effect. Take for example Patriot missles. They don't fail on test ranges. They fail in the field thousands of miles from manufacture in terrible conditions. I see missiles in this game as a cost dump and an effective way of limiting wealth.

[Havoc2]

IMO this is a moot point as the trajectory of a LRM should suggest that if it misses its target it would slam into the ground.
Example of the trajectory would be a golf ball. To hit a target at 1000m the missiles would launch at a 35 degree angle (for example) before hitting their maximum height and dropping at a 60 degree angle. The steeper descent would add to the velocity of the weapon increasing its kinetic force and its accuracy (less chance of something dodging or getting away).

SRMs could follow a similar idea except following a path more like a football. Fairly even and fast with a drop off after its peak height (so maybe to hit the centre torso of an Atlas the missile(s) start off aimed about 10m above the head and after 300m end up at throat height, but after 400m would end up hitting in the leg area.

Perhaps missiles should have 3 ratings?

Minimum range
Ideal range
Maximum range

Edited by }{avoc, 27 February 2012 - 01:05 PM.

[SquareSphere]

explode at max range, purely because it reduces the calcs needed to track all of the missile entities, ie lighten server load

[verybad]

I think glide and lose altitude till hiting something (ground, building, or even a mech. Makes for the "extreme range" that's available as an advanced rule in TT games. Just blowing up at a max range is a bit lame. Have them lose all guidance at max range, so actually hitimg something is really difficult however. Have the last part of this not take long though as it is a server track issue.

Edited by verybad, 27 February 2012 - 01:19 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I can't use the poll because guided and unguided missiles need to be treated differently.

• Unguided missiles should cruise to their max range, then run out of fuel and glide down a (artifically-steepened) ballistic trajectory to the ground, or whatever is in its path.
  
• Guided Missiles, should they miss their target, should remotely-explode after they have traveled a distance equal to their max range.

This is somewhat realistic because guided munitions are designed to avoid causing collateral damage, and so they are fused for a certain range. The only reason to fuse an unguided missile is if you are intending to use a splash-effect to create area damage... and I doubt that will be a very useful technique in MWO because the MechWarrior missiles I have always encountered exhibit very little splash range, if any at all.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 27 February 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[ManDaisy]

Poll Choices Updated.

Park makes an interesting point, SRMs should be able to be dumb fired in an arc so that you can fire over cover like a short range grenade or motor shell.

[Tezz LaCoil]

A missile's life cycle typically works as so, if not detonated automatically by signal or onboard computer device when it runs out of fuel:

1) Launch
2) Accelerate Under Power
3) Continue Until Out of Fuel
4) Glide, or Physics Takes Over
5) Impact and/or Detonation
6) If Not Detonation, Then Becomes UXO.

I think that if missiles fail to hit a target and exceed maximum range, there is a chance that they will become a UXO, or Unexploded Ordinance. This could litter the battlefield with small explosives, which are danrgerous, and open up many new strategies for Commanders to impliment. For instance, if CBU's (Cluster Bomb Units) are launched, and based on a percentage, some of the munitions do not go off, they become UXO's and you have essentially created an improvised minefield. Plus, Mechwarriors will have to watch out for UXO's, to ensure their legs are not damaged by an errant missile laying about on the ground.

Of course, there needs to be a device to detect or clean up these UXO's that can be deployed by a Scout, or by the Commander, whichever is deemed most appropriate.

[TheRulesLawyer]

There are already munitions that do this in the BTU without having to deal with unintended ones. Plus that is a whole lot of tracking of munitions out of the field for extended periods of time. Better off to ignore UXO.