13 replies to this topic

[Aegis Kleais]

This is the way I envision IFF (Identify Friend/Foe) working in tandem with Radar and LOS/D (Line of Sight/Detection) This goes too on the assumption that teams will NOT be forced to a color-based paintjob, so methods of IFF are needed for engagement ops.

IFF BASICS
Each Mech transmits a signal to a set range which, when in LOS/D of a teammate, places a marker over their head indicating them as an ally. In the event the Mech enters LOS/D and does not have the same IFF signal, it is instead marked as an enemy unit.

If jamming comes into play then both friend/foe in LOS/D would come up with a gray marker, requiring the player to manually identify them before engaging. This might mean keeping LOS/D on the player until they get player name information which can be cross checked with the scoreboard to ID the pilot.

LOS/D VS. RADAR DETECTION
The 2 methods of targeting are LOS/D and Radar. LOS/D is segregated into LOS and LOD and Radar runs in 2 modes: Active and Passive. "Probing" is the sequence by which over time, the stages of targeting are progressed from Marker to Player Name/Chassis to Armor Indicator to Full Data.

LOS is the fastest method by which probing advances. If you can keep a Mech in LOS, you'll progress through probing the fastest. This is tempered by your range to the enemy as well. ie, you can have LOS on a target 1000m away, but probing will take significantly longer than if you were closer to the target.

LOD is a method of targeting/probing that uses other-than-player tech. This can be a UAV drone or a spotter in tandem with target-sharing modules. LOD would have the same probing rate as LOS. LOS/D's limitation are that they require detection in the player's field of view. Once Mechs move out of LOS/D, probing decay begins where if they are not reacquired into LOS/D in a set time, all targeting information is lost on them.

RADAR handles detection from blindspots. Its 2 modes merely changes the range at which they can detect Mechs in your blindspots. The probing rate for radar is slower than LOS/D. This means that it will always be faster to acquire targeting info on enemies by bringing them into LOS/D, but if you cannot, in a longer timeframe, radar will pickup enemies whom you WOULD have had LOS with had you were looking in their direction. ie. If a Mech is behind you, but behind a hill, your radar will not pick them up because had you been looking in that direction, you would have no LOS with the target. The moment the Mech crests the kill and comes into what would have been LOS, radar begins its rate of probing and the Mech's enemy marker will show up on the BattleGrid. Radar, too, is tempered by range, meaning targets farther away will take much longer to progress through probing than up close.

When ACTIVE, radar operates at maximum range. Any Mech you have Radar-LOS with in that range will begin to get probed and show up accordingly. In order for a enemy Mech to show up on radar-LOS, it has to be powered up and it's current radar range has to be at a distance of (or less than) its max range.

PASSIVE radar offers a pro/con system. When passive, your radar's detection range is lessened (meaning an enemy can get closer on your blindspot before your system begins detection) however this works both ways. Let's use the following examples: (numbers are estimates, let's say active radar has a range of 1000m and passive is 500m)

If Mech A is active and Mech B is active, they will begin radar-los detection at 1000m.
If Mech A is active and Mech B is passive, they will begin radar-los detection at 500m.
If Mech A is passive and Mech B is passive, they will begin radar-los detection at 250m.

THIS is how I am envisioning LOS/D, Targeting/Probing and Radar Modes. ANY FEEDBACK/IDEAS/COMMENTS?

[Tannhauser Gate]

Well written.

Having some direct experience with IFF systems, maybe I can add some detail to your run down.

Basically, IFF describes code reply systems installed in the vehicles (aircraft in my case) that actively reply to interrogation requests by an observing system. The IFF transponder transmits a coded reply that is then verified and the observed vehicle is then classified as military, civilian, hostile, friendly, or unknown. Modern IFF systems are integrated into communications equipment and operate in the background as part of standard checks and layers of security. In a theatre of conflict, upon interrogation they transmit secret operational mission unit codes which are either resolved (friend) or unresolved (foe or unknown). If they are unresolved then further interrogation takes place in addition to other systems like active detection (directional radar etc) coming into play to add layers of identification.

In a MW situation, and someone more familiar with BT IFF systems is welcome to chime in, IFF would also be enhanced by satellite observation, C3, and drones. It would likewise be suppressed (no reply to interrogation unless it receives a friendly code first) or disabled entirely if the mech is using C3 or running dark.

I dont necessarily agree that MW IFF would be reliant on active or passive radar. The ability to interrogate and reply with other mechs should be part of other communication systems but layer in radar when needed. However, for simplicity sake (or canon) IFF function in MWO should be balanced.

[MaddMaxx]

I like the OP with one slight tweak/removal.

NO OVERHEAD ICONS (insert some form of vulgarity here) PLEASE!!!!!!

[Aegis Kleais]

I made a graphic if it helps

[Aegis Kleais]

LakeDaemon, on 03 April 2012 - 09:17 AM, said:

Well written.

Having some direct experience with IFF systems, maybe I can add some detail to your run down.

Basically, IFF describes code reply systems installed in the vehicles (aircraft in my case) that actively reply to interrogation requests by an observing system. The IFF transponder transmits a coded reply that is then verified and the observed vehicle is then classified as military, civilian, hostile, friendly, or unknown. Modern IFF systems are integrated into communications equipment and operate in the background as part of standard checks and layers of security. In a theatre of conflict, upon interrogation they transmit secret operational mission unit codes which are either resolved (friend) or unresolved (foe or unknown). If they are unresolved then further interrogation takes place in addition to other systems like active detection (directional radar etc) coming into play to add layers of identification.

In a MW situation, and someone more familiar with BT IFF systems is welcome to chime in, IFF would also be enhanced by satellite observation, C3, and drones. It would likewise be suppressed (no reply to interrogation unless it receives a friendly code first) or disabled entirely if the mech is using C3 or running dark.

I dont necessarily agree that MW IFF would be reliant on active or passive radar. The ability to interrogate and reply with other mechs should be part of other communication systems but layer in radar when needed. However, for simplicity sake (or canon) IFF function in MWO should be balanced.

Thanks for the background info.

What I may have been trying to suggest was that radar mode is also tandem with "sensor ranges". So that when you make your radar go passive (in an attempt to hide yourself) you are also limiting other ranges of sensors as the same time (which would be the IFF beacon signal in this case) So for clarification, it wouldn't be radar, per se, that is performing the IFF (that would be the beacon transponder's job), but the transponder's range would be limited to that of the radar's mode. Would that be plausible?

@MaddMaxx-
By "overhead icons" I mean the things we see on our HUD where the targeting reticule puts a visual identifier in your field of view to either mark something as a friendly or enemy. Are you saying you don't want those, or are you talking about something else?

[Tannhauser Gate]

Yeah thats plausible and I like the graphic. very cool.

Timberwolves? I see what you did there. lol

[Sarriss]

I like the ideas, I think it will probably work in a very similar way once we have our hands on it, my only question is, what about your LOS/D when your ally has LOS/D. In other words, I'm 750 meters away, running in passive, my ally and the enemy are engaged in conflict, I can hear my ally saying he's engaged near my position, I switch to active, I can pick him up however the target is say 450 meters ahead of him, effectively 1200 meters ahead of my current position. Will I be able to pick him up on my radar because my ally, within radar change picks him up? I guess that's a long winded way of asking if Allies can add known targets to my radar as long as they are within my 500 or 1000 meter range respectively.

Additionally, do you think we might have a mini map and in these scenarios receive no information on radar but get a red blip on our map as to their approximate location?

I know there is no concrete answer yet, but I ask purely based on the ideas you have given. I apologize in advance if I have misread or misinterpreted your ideas and this question is redundant.

[Helmer]

I'm very interested in seeing how far and in depth PGI takes the mechanics of enemy detection. With their various detection methods (LOS, Radar, Thermal Imaging , etc) along with the different modifiers (Active, Passive, Narc, TAG, ECM, etc) it can get very tactical and interesting.

I was interested at first about IFF spoofing, and am curious to see if they go that route. My first inclination is one of a negative feeling for the issues it could create with intentional griefing and FF incidents.
But I have great faith in PGI, so we will see what they come up with apon initial release, 6 months after release, a year later, etc etc.

Watching this game dynamically grow is going to be very interesting!!!




Cheers.

[Siilk]

Excellent post, Aegis. Love your ideas.

[Aegis Kleais]

LakeDaemon, on 03 April 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

Yeah thats plausible and I like the graphic. very cool.

Timberwolves? I see what you did there. lol

Shhhh! It's subliminal! *sheepish grin*

Sarriss, on 03 April 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

I like the ideas, I think it will probably work in a very similar way once we have our hands on it, my only question is, what about your LOS/D when your ally has LOS/D. In other words, I'm 750 meters away, running in passive, my ally and the enemy are engaged in conflict, I can hear my ally saying he's engaged near my position, I switch to active, I can pick him up however the target is say 450 meters ahead of him, effectively 1200 meters ahead of my current position. Will I be able to pick him up on my radar because my ally, within radar change picks him up? I guess that's a long winded way of asking if Allies can add known targets to my radar as long as they are within my 500 or 1000 meter range respectively.

Additionally, do you think we might have a mini map and in these scenarios receive no information on radar but get a red blip on our map as to their approximate location?

I know there is no concrete answer yet, but I ask purely based on the ideas you have given. I apologize in advance if I have misread or misinterpreted your ideas and this question is redundant.

To answer your question in the event you are running passive (active Mech detection at 500m, passive at 250m) IF you have the modules that SHARE targeting information, and your teammate has LOS/D with an enemy then you will get the spotter's enemy information on your battlegrid as well at 1200m out. This occurs once you go active. In other words if your current radar range cannot get to your ally, you cannot receive their targeting data. This prevents LRM boats from sitting in passive and getting forward spotting recon units to just paint something and then indirect dumb fire salvos. Support mechs would need to be active and in range of their teammate whose targeting data they are receiving, and then they need to be in weapons damage range to do damage to those targets.

Now, as for engaging that enemy, let's say you have LRM's. They would gain a passive lock on the enemy but you'd be out of weapons range (since they're rated for 1000m) You'd have to move forward enough to assist with your ally. Also, like direct-fire LRM locks, the spotter would have to maintain a LOS hold on the target for you to gain the passive lock. If they moved their reticule off the enemy, you'd lose your ability to lock on and fire (when in range) but you'd still have the enemy position on your map/radar.

I would hope that the radar and minimap are merged into 1 device. Radar overlaying the map grid. And any teammate in range of your current radar who is using the same target-sharing module, would provide you with their target data.

And yeah, this is all speculation; it's just how I'm envisioning things would work with what we're seen/heard.

Edited by Aegis Kleaisâ„¢, 03 April 2012 - 11:48 AM.

[Kaemon]

MaddMaxx, on 03 April 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

I like the OP with one slight tweak/removal.

NO OVERHEAD ICONS (insert some form of vulgarity here) PLEASE!!!!!!

Overlay (HUD) not Overhead.

The SIMS style overhead markers make things look goofy.

Good post, I still think LOS for Radar (especially active radar) is goofy, not for the obstructions but it should allow 360 degree coverage.

[Sarriss]

Aegis Kleais™, on 03 April 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

Shhhh! It's subliminal! *sheepish grin*

To answer your question in the event you are running passive (active Mech detection at 500m, passive at 250m) IF you have the modules that SHARE targeting information, and your teammate has LOS/D with an enemy then you will get the spotter's enemy information on your battlegrid as well at 1200m out. This occurs once you go active. In other words if your current radar range cannot get to your ally, you cannot receive their targeting data. This prevents LRM boats from sitting in passive and getting forward spotting recon units to just paint something and then indirect dumb fire salvos. Support mechs would need to be active and in range of their teammate whose targeting data they are receiving, and then they need to be in weapons damage range to do damage to those targets.

Now, as for engaging that enemy, let's say you have LRM's. They would gain a passive lock on the enemy but you'd be out of weapons range (since they're rated for 1000m) You'd have to move forward enough to assist with your ally. Also, like direct-fire LRM locks, the spotter would have to maintain a LOS hold on the target for you to gain the passive lock. If they moved their reticule off the enemy, you'd lose your ability to lock on and fire (when in range) but you'd still have the enemy position on your map/radar.

I would hope that the radar and minimap are merged into 1 device. Radar overlaying the map grid. And any teammate in range of your current radar who is using the same target-sharing module, would provide you with their target data.

And yeah, this is all speculation; it's just how I'm envisioning things would work with what we're seen/heard.

Thanks, that pretty much answers my question based on your LOS/D theories. I really hope they put a focus on C3s and Information warfare so that you are significantly hindered if you don't at least try to coordinate with your lancemates.

[Aegis Kleais]

Kaemon, on 03 April 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

Overlay (HUD) not Overhead.

The SIMS style overhead markers make things look goofy.

Good post, I still think LOS for Radar (especially active radar) is goofy, not for the obstructions but it should allow 360 degree coverage.

? But Radar was explained as having 360 degree detection. For clarification, it needs to be able to see the enemy AS IF your Mech had been facing that way and looking towards where the enemy was (if an obstruction was in the way like a hill or building, radar would not detect it)

This would be offset by top-down LOD methods like UAV/Satellite Scans or by using modules and having someone else who is in range with LOS on the target relay their information to you.

Or are you a proponent of radar just being forward-looking only?

[Kaemon]

Aegis Kleais™, on 03 April 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:

? But Radar was explained as having 360 degree detection. For clarification, it needs to be able to see the enemy AS IF your Mech had been facing that way and looking towards where the enemy was (if an obstruction was in the way like a hill or building, radar would not detect it)

This would be offset by top-down LOD methods like UAV/Satellite Scans or by using modules and having someone else who is in range with LOS on the target relay their information to you.

Or are you a proponent of radar just being forward-looking only?

oh, then I'm ok with it.