77 replies to this topic

[daytrader]

Buying davion bonds to be disposed of on the secondary market after I singlehandedly trash their economy.

[ManDaisy]

With each step clasp their trusting hands and pull them forward. With each step urge them on until they are breathless. Then when the earth meets the heavens, repel with them with blinding fury so that their fall may be all the more swifter and their landing all the more harder. ~ Unknown philosopher

Edited by ManDaisy, 27 February 2012 - 09:48 AM.

[Mason Grimm]

Seems to be a fair bit of derailing going on in here...

Let's save the philosophy and bond buying advice and keep this on topic fellas

[ManDaisy]

Speed up missiles > might as well let us shoot them down,
Keep slow missiles > People complain how they should be able to be shot down.

Catch 22.

[Aegis Kleais]

I only suggest faster missiles to offset their already existing excess of cons that no other weapon type suffers, namely:

L/AMS subsystem lowers their potency
Require excessive "Time-To-Target"

But it's not like they don't have pros that no other weapon has either, such as their ability to lock/track.

Mainly, I don't suggest the ability to shoot missiles down simply because humans don't have a realistic reflex or skill at shooting down targets at (the suggested) speed.

But, that's just me...

[TimberJon]

No catch 22's allowed. So you use the physics-based Cry3 engine to have missiles fly at an appropriate speed based on todays examples. How slow would they move? They are heavy and don't have crap like antigravity.

I vote no manually shooting of projectiles. Don't give the Devs more work than they already have. I firmly believe that this is an unnecessary feature that would stray from the vision of gameplay.

What nobody brought up was the system resource drag that having independently rendered missiles might produce, AND the ability to target and destroy them independently. In MW3 each missile was I believe.. rendered independently, and when a boat or two fired missile salvos at the same time, the game lagged hard for a second to keep up. MW4 had it as a cloud, which probably was rendered as a single object so as to reduce the memory requirements for drawing them.

I for one do not want any feature that would create unnecessary resource drag. Nobody cares that you have an awesome GFX card or SLI, etc... and your system can handle it. The other members of your unit might not.

[SI The Joker]

With regard to missle speeds... LRMs should be slower than SRMs (Opinion). I believe that's been something the "sim" part of pretty much every mech game took into account already... maybe I'm wrong.

I still say... if you are in a mech that has no business going up against a mech with long range weaponry (IE small lasers and short range ballistics), and you're out in the middle of an open field with no cover... you're going to lose. L/AMS won't save you, neither would shooting your machine gun into a volley of incoming LRMs.

I started writing something about the resources I would think are involved, and TimberJon posted something to the same effect... so I won't go further there.

Edited by SI The Joker, 27 February 2012 - 10:43 AM.

[TimberJon]

I never noticed whether or not LRM's were any slower than SRM's in either mw3 or mw4 (mw2 was too long ago to remember). The only thing that might be an illusion as to their speed is the time it took for them to reach their target due only to the factor of distance.

Why would an LRM which is say 75% motor and 25% warhead, move slower?
and why would an SRM which is say 33% motor and 67% warhead, move faster?

LRMs are launched from farther out, so wouldn't you want them to get to target faster?
Whereas, SRM's are launched at close range, so since they require less time to meet the target, why would they need to fly any faster?

[Kaemon]

3 things quickly - (background info for most)

1. background http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Anti-Missile_System (sorry if it's been posted, I didn't see it)

2. Flechette rounds make more sense (think shotgun) proximity fuses defeat that.

3. Mech mortars would work where missile systems don't http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Mech_mortar

So there's a chance for some added complexity (in a fun way, mind you) that missiles are direct/lower angle fired arty options, with longer range/possibly lower damage.

MechMortar could be more verticle option (think urban combat) with shorter range/higher damage.

So along with the Naval/Obital bombardments, you'd have these options for 'surgical' or different style arty strikes as well.

So yes to missiles being a dynamic object in the environment (with very low %/hit), mortars would not be.

Edited by Kaemon, 27 February 2012 - 10:59 AM.

[ManDaisy]

@ Timber

There was a discussion about missile speed and tracking a while back. Basically the concept was that a slower missile would correct it angle more degrees per distance then a faster missile.

LRMs are being guided were assumed to be slower due to the importance of tracking over longer distances. SRMs were assumed to be faster due to their unguided nature.

LRMs would carry more fuel and burn at a slower rate to get distance effiency.

SRMS would carry less fuel and burn at a faster rate to get speed and to make up for their payload.

The SRM being a close fighting weapon is designed to travel strait to its target, thus is travels faster(burns fuel more), and thus has less of an ability to compensate for angle of tracking.

In LRM designed for distance, such large distances with little angle correction would lead to inaccuracy, thus it (carries more fuel and burns slower) in order to allow the LRM cpu time to correct its path towards its target.

Edited by ManDaisy, 27 February 2012 - 11:26 AM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Believe you me, you don't want to compare missiles in-game to speeds we see missiles have today. Some missiles are known to go Mach 3.5 (2600+MPH) That's supersonic (half a mile a second) and very hard to really fathom from a standing still point.

[Morashtak]

WWII era LRMs in action;



Still seems a bit on the lucky side to shoot even one down if you are on the receiving end.

[ManDaisy]

Keep telling you thats not the issue. The issue is if they are unaffected by weapons fire or not. Keep beating your straw man tho.

[Morashtak]

ManDaisy, on 27 February 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

Keep telling you thats not the issue. The issue is if they are unaffected by weapons fire or not. Keep beating your straw man tho.

Fine, fine...

IF (<== biggest font I could use or it would be bigger) you can hit one it blows up real good. okay?

[ManDaisy]

LBX autocannon.

[SilentObserver]

ManDaisy, on 27 February 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

LBX autocannon.

Still can't prove you actually hit a missile.

This would be, in terms of size, trying to shoot an incoming bullet with a shotgun. 1 time in a million you hit that bullet. Lets have the dev's work on something that might happen in my lifetime shall we?

[Insidious Johnson]

SilentObserver, on 27 February 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

Still can't prove you actually hit a missile.

This would be, in terms of size, trying to shoot an incoming bullet with a shotgun. 1 time in a million you hit that bullet. Lets have the dev's work on something that might happen in my lifetime shall we?

Okies, you can die now

[SilentObserver]

Insidious Johnson, on 27 February 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Okies, you can die now

Ok so now we know that an AMS system works. Now show me a video of them knocking down a missile with a deck gun.

[ManDaisy]

So what do you want to see? A man on a deck holding something or behind something? Thats not how its gonna work. If anything its gonna be the exact same video footage but the "manual" guy/girl will be in a control room somewhere.

[Strum Wealh]

Aegis Kleais™, on 27 February 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

Believe you me, you don't want to compare missiles in-game to speeds we see missiles have today. Some missiles are known to go Mach 3.5 (2600+MPH) That's supersonic (half a mile a second) and very hard to really fathom from a standing still point.

Morashtak, on 27 February 2012 - 04:07 PM, said:

WWII era LRMs in action;



Still seems a bit on the lucky side to shoot even one down if you are on the receiving end.

Except the LRMs (120 per metric ton, or 8.33kg/18.36lbs per missile) and SRMs (100 per metric ton, or 10.00kg/22.05lbs per missile) in the BT universe are on the same scale (mass-wise, and probably size/volume-wise as well) as shoulder-fired MANPAD missiles like the Stinger and the Redeye, a class of missiles that typically have flight speeds of 400 to 800 m/s (approximately 894.77 to 1,789.55 mph)...

Edited by Strum Wealh, 28 February 2012 - 08:33 AM.