21 replies to this topic

[wwiiogre]

Unfortunately I have to strongly disagree with the devs that the farther away a target the less convergence should be an issue. I think this should be approached the same way that world war two planes had the problem.

A plane with mg's on the wings would have them pre aimed towards a certain point in front of the plane such that the bullets would not have lost velocity or penetrating power or destructive power and then they would cross and become less damaging and less accurate.

This seems to be the natural way for the Dev's to actually implement weapon ranges. In Canon they state unequivocally that the weapons far outrange the targeting ability of the mechs and the pilots. I agree with this and lasers have extreme ranges, ppcs, etc.

What is my opinion is that the original targeting computers used set a max convergence setting where multiple weapons would be effective similar to planes of world war two. Such that you would get a crossing of streams of lasers or ac rounds at max effective range. What does that do for a single mounted weapon like a PPC or AC, nothing, firing a single weapon has always been more effective in the game and is talked about in the fiction all the time. Yet even then it is that 1/3 or extreme range shot but nothing ever over that range. Medium Laser has 270 meter max range, which to me means it loses potency and accuracy past that range, or targeting is horrible and the weapon is more inaccurate. But in TT canon says you get 90 more meters for extreme range or Medium Lasers having a 360 meter range max.

Since we know that LRM's can track and target even out to 630 meters and extreme ranges 840 meters then how do they target. Assume since every single missile rarely hits, It is using a cone effect and isn't actually specifically targeting a part of the mech but is trying to put most of the missiles into a spot the mech will occupy when it gets there or the missiles have seeker heads and lock on and some of them lose lock because of the other missiles, duds, etc.

Either way, if you allow medium lasers to have unlimited range in a straight line with no crossing convergence, you are setting the game up to be a laser boat fest with zoom optics since you get rewarded for it.

I say go the other route now and it lets you stay canon and takes care of the long distance sniping with weapons that shouldn't be doing that in the first place.

just a thought,

chris

[wwiiogre]

bump

[Siilk]

I have not the slightest idea what are you taking about/asking for... Can you try to be more clear?

[Hunter1428]

I completely understand what you are talking about. But for realism it would not work, We are not in WW2 anymore. What I am saying is that it would be silly for a mech with such advanced technology to follow the same rules of a WW2 plane.

[Soviet Alex]

WW2 planes had fixed weapons. You aimed them by turning the plane. Mech weapons have servo-mounts, so they focus on the designated target. Convergence is calculated automatically by the targeting computer based on what the rangefinder is telling it.

[wwiiogre]

I am trying to come up with a solution for max range, the Dev's are already using convergence as a tool in the game. In table top there are max effective ranges for weapons. Why? Why do they have max ranges? How can a max range be worked into a game if lasers can shoot straight all the way to the horizon? Same as PPC's and we all know that kinetic weapons such as cannon rounds can travel much farther than what is shown in the game. Same as missiles.

So you have a table top universe and fiction for Battletech that states weapons have a max effective range. It rarely gets into why? Sometimes it states the targeting computers just are not upto keeping the crosshairs on the target. Sometimes its states the weapons lose focus or have safety triggers on them in the case of missiles and either cause the missiles to explode or dud.

I am trying to find a way that will make lasers and other weapons not become more accurate at range. Instead of less accurate as you would think would happen. As convergence is listed at this point both in writing by the dev's and what I saw in the game footage shown, the lasers seem to fire perfectly straight and out to the horizon, meaning a small laser and medium laser were still being shot and were still doing damage way beyond canon ranges. 270 meters and 90 meters respectively.

As a tool for the developers I am suggesting crossing the convergence of multiple weapons at max range. Single fired weapons would still be a problem since they wouldn't cross, but generally you have a much easier chance sniping with a single weapon than with weapons firing from multiple points.

chris

[Dlardrageth]

Hunter1428, on 10 March 2012 - 03:31 AM, said:

I completely understand what you are talking about. But for realism it would not work, We are not in WW2 anymore. What I am saying is that it would be silly for a mech with such advanced technology to follow the same rules of a WW2 plane.

That was an example, sheesh. If you would extrapolate from current technology into the BT universe, you'd like end up witha totally different game where each Mech carries around a couple nukes and what not. That's not really the point here though.

And the OP has a point that max range and perfect accuracy at that range make no sense at all. In particular with weapons like the standard medium laser which was not designed like, say, an AC2, to be a long-range sniper weapon. And once the max range is reached the shot also just vanishes into thin air, right? So unless you want a heavy bias towards a "RNG to rule them all", the OP has a point if I understand him correctly. It might come down to a mild stacking nerf for multiple weapons firing at max. range. Aka you firing 3 ERPPCs on different locations on your Mech having more of an accuracy issue than the next Mech over which tries the same with a single ERLrgLaser.

And I'm pretty sure some assault-lovers will not like that, as it makes alpha'ing down everything in sight harder, but I personally could care less about that. After all a feature in line with benefits for the whole game > some random munchkins.

[Bryan Ekman]

Some weapons converge others do not. Arm weapons converge, as they should. Torso mounted weapons, can, but not nearly as much. Lasers fire across the map, but we've tuned them to lose energy overtime inspired by TT ranges (realistic or not). This is a game.Game balance will always trump realism.

[wwiiogre]

thank you Bryan I was hoping to hear as much. Have a great weekend and thanks for all the glorious bits from GDC.

chris

[TheRulesLawyer]

Aegis Kleais™, on 10 March 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

Is the damage dropoff with those lasers non-linear? ie, Do they begin to lose damage at an equal rate from the range they leave the Mech or do they maintain a certain damage for a set duration before they variably lose damage potential (despite the fact they visually go on indefinitely)?

It would have to be non linear or they would be stupid powerful at close range.

[Stripes]

It is a real fact - in atmosphere laser based weaponery loose power very quickly. Air simply absord radiation generated by laser - but not so heavyly as dust or moisture. In "moon"-like enviroment on the other hand... ah, the possobilities!

[Lycan]

Dlardrageth, on 10 March 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

That was an example, sheesh. If you would extrapolate from current technology into the BT universe, you'd like end up witha totally different game where each Mech carries around a couple nukes and what not. That's not really the point here though.

And the OP has a point that max range and perfect accuracy at that range make no sense at all. In particular with weapons like the standard medium laser which was not designed like, say, an AC2, to be a long-range sniper weapon. And once the max range is reached the shot also just vanishes into thin air, right? So unless you want a heavy bias towards a "RNG to rule them all", the OP has a point if I understand him correctly. It might come down to a mild stacking nerf for multiple weapons firing at max. range. Aka you firing 3 ERPPCs on different locations on your Mech having more of an accuracy issue than the next Mech over which tries the same with a single ERLrgLaser.

And I'm pretty sure some assault-lovers will not like that, as it makes alpha'ing down everything in sight harder, but I personally could care less about that. After all a feature in line with benefits for the whole game > some random munchkins.

i know you weren't talking directly to me but I like piloting Heavy/Assault mechs and *I* wouldn't have a problem with this at all.

Edited by Lycan, 10 March 2012 - 04:19 PM.

[Dlardrageth]

Lycan, on 10 March 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

i know you weren't talking directly to me but I like piloting Heavy/Assault mechs and *I* wouldn't have a problem with this at all.

Probably should have bolded the "some" there. And Assault Mechs are the likely focus group for that, as not many other Mechs could mount the 3 ERPPCs from my example above.

[Lycan]

Dlardrageth, on 10 March 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

Probably should have bolded the "some" there. And Assault Mechs are the likely focus group for that, as not many other Mechs could mount the 3 ERPPCs from my example above.

Naw, you were pretty clear. I just wanted to toss you a bit of support.

Although, rereading it does bring up an question. An Assault might be the only chassis with the ability to mount 3 ER PPCs but it's not the only chassis the mounts weapons in different locations so wouldn't you're theory apply to firing any type of weapon from multiple location?

[Dlardrageth]

Sure would to some degree. But even if we go with, say, AC2s, how many light or medium chassis mount multiples of those? I could think of a Blackjack variant, but that's about it out of my head. And it is - IMHO - really a matter that becomes interesting at long/extreme ranges mainly. If you apply the same to MGs or SmlLas without factoring the range issue in (plus the fact that you don't need to aim quite as precisely at a Mech basically stepping on your toes), you risk rendering those quite useless.

The convergence becomes less of a matter there, as you facing another Mech frontally at close range makes convergence less of a problem. Sure, like in the saying "cannot hit the broadside of a barn" can sometimes apply nevertheless, but at higher distances even being 10° off with your torso can make the shot miss, in close quarters it likely will just hit another part of the enemy Mech. That same Mech being 6-700m away makes this more of a factor. As the chance to hit "something" with a shot instead of it going into the clouds becomes considerably smaller.

[Bryan Ekman]

Aegis Kleais™, on 10 March 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

Is the damage dropoff with those lasers non-linear? ie, Do they begin to lose damage at an equal rate from the range they leave the Mech or do they maintain a certain damage for a set duration before they variably lose damage potential (despite the fact they visually go on indefinitely)?

Max damage to max range, fall of to 0 from max range to max render distance. Thiis is the current test setup. May change during beta.

[Aegis Kleais]

Bryan Ekman, on 11 March 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

Max damage to max range, fall of to 0 from max range to max render distance. Thiis is the current test setup. May change during beta.

Nice. Should open up a new dynamic to the importance of lasers.

[Iron Wardog]

Bryan Ekman, on 11 March 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

Max damage to max range, fall of to 0 from max range to max render distance. Thiis is the current test setup. May change during beta.

If this means linear fall off, does this not excessively benefits short range lasers? Taking an arbitrary render distance of 5km and small laser range of 250m, the small laser would still be doing half its damage at 2625m.

[Morgana]

Would it be correct to assume pulse lasers would have a quicker drop off?

[Aegis Kleais]

With how convergence was explained so far in this game, I like it. You'll have to learn to estimate the time it takes to move between close to long range convergence. There's definitely going to be a lot of skill involved in getting your shots onto target, but it sounds like it'll just take experience to get better; and that sounds great in my book.