44 replies to this topic

[Dihm]

Direct fire does not equate to "dumb fire".

Quote

Direct fire refers to the launching of a projectile directly at a target on a relatively flat trajectory. The firing weapon must have asighting device and an unobstructed line of sight to the target, which means no objects or friendly units can be between it and the target. A weapon engaged in direct fire exposes itself to return fire from the target.

By contrast, indirect fire refers to firing a projectile on a ballistic trajectory or delivering munitions by guided or unguidedmissiles. Indirect fire does not need a direct line of sight to the target because the shots are normally directed by a forwardobserver. As such, indirect fire weapons can shoot over obstacles or friendly units and the weapons be can be concealed from direct return fire.

It can still be direct fire and not be dumb, it can have a lock and guidance.

This would enable it to actually make sense with the usage of Streak. Streak requires a hard lock, you can't dumb fire them like you could a standard SRM launcher (without a lock). This is done to conserve ammo.

This would enable it to actually make sense with Artemis. Artemis is another type of Fire Control System which places a dome near the enhanced launcher containing "an infrared laser designation, target lock mechanism, and tight-beam microwave transmitter that - together with specialized missile control systems - help focus the spread of all missile volleys so enhanced."

Having SRMs be dumb-fire rockets makes these two systems and their interactions with SRMs make little sense.


TL:DR
LRMs - indirect guided missiles
SRMs - direct guided missiles
Rockets - direct stupid rockets

Edited by Dihm, 07 May 2012 - 01:04 PM.

[Dihm]

I will admit that the "problem" with this is it sort of makes Streaks redundant, unless you really have no self-control.

[Solis Obscuri]

Dihm, on 07 May 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

I will admit that the "problem" with this is it sort of makes Streaks redundant, unless you really have no self-control.

Not really. Streaks still have much more accurate guidance than standard SRMs, and don't waste ammo if they can't get lock.

[veretax]

I'd forgotten about the THB Deadfire munitions which actually had no guidance at all. LOL

But yeah, I see SRMs as having limited guidance capability based on initial firing picture or something like that.

[Sprouticus]

Solis Obscuri, on 07 May 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

Not really. Streaks still have much more accurate guidance than standard SRMs, and don't waste ammo if they can't get lock.

Make SRM's require X time (say 2-3 seconds) to lock.
If you are not aiming at a section after a lock they act like LRM's and spread damage
If you are pointing at a section after lock they go for that section

Make streak lock instantly or make streaks all hit 1 section regardless of where your cursor is pointing.

[Adridos]

They are SRM's. Small range equates they expect you are up there personla with the other mech and so they sacrifice the ´guidance systems for hitting a pin head 2 km away for more explosives.

What would be the point of MRM's and LRM's if SRM's were the lightest, hardest hitting missiles you could put on your mech?

[Dihm]

So, are you arguing that they should be rockets, due to gameplay concerns?

[Adridos]

As long as I can tell them where to land, which way to go, they aren't rockets by your definition.

Rockets- point it in the direction and launch:


Missile - "tell them" where to land (SRMs), what to land on (LRMs):

[Garth Erlam]

Sprouticus, on 07 May 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:

Make SRM's require X time (say 2-3 seconds) to lock. If you are not aiming at a section after a lock they act like LRM's and spread damage If you are pointing at a section after lock they go for that section Make streak lock instantly or make streaks all hit 1 section regardless of where your cursor is pointing.

I accept all suggestions, all criticisms, etc, but I ask you to look at the following, just an idea:
SRM lock in 3 seconds, can be fired earlier.
SRM reload time: 3 seconds
SSRM lock in 3 seconds.
SSRM reload time: 3 seconds.

What would be the point of SRMs? Even if we tweak these times, unless you're firing a salvo every second or so, and lock on times are really long, no-one would use SRMs... and then with the above changes they'd never use SSRMs.

I'm not saying SRMs will never be guided in any way (I notice no-one seems to be thinking that maybe the missile systems are incomplete because it's a beta) but consider what you're asking for here

[Monky]

I see two competing problems;

First is the TT/Wordplay problem, in TT, they are treated as 'guided' so long as you have a lock, but can be direct fired with no guidance. The wordplay of missile vs rocket is complicated and depends entirely on intent; Missiles are technically any object propelled toward a target, but in military speak it usually means a weapon with a fuel based engine that is guided in some way, whereas a rocket is almost always the same but without any sort of guidance beyond stabilizing fins and maybe a flight timer.

The second is gameplay balance. If SRM's are allowed to achieve a lock and then be fired at short ranges, you're looking at 12 damage per salvo, per launcher, for an SRM6. A Dervish (winner of medium mech poll) outfitted with 4 SRM6 and 2 Med lasers can pump out it's own tonnage in damage with a full lock, easily relegating other close range configurations to the scrapheap. Some level of inaccuracy is kind of necessary, but how do you institute failed locks/missile trajectory going crazy/etc at close range with short flight times without just frustrating the hell out of the player?

I think the best overall solution to the problem is have SRM missiles be considered listen-kill missiles that don't have a lock from your mech's guidance system, but from the missile itself. An Artemis IV system can still boost the accuracy of the missiles (since it's like a laser designator) but they have to search for their own targets and some may or may not find a target depending on player's ability to get the missile oriented before firing. Streaks would actually have a lock on your end, and prevent firing without it.

Comparatively, LRM systems can use Artemis IV in direct fire mode while dumbfired or locked, but can also lock independently of this allowing indirect fire.

Essentially - the SRM/LRM missiles would operate as active radar missiles when fired, with their own ability to find/track/hit the target, when equipped with Artemis IV they would act as semi-active missiles, receiving guidance from the Artemis IV device, and with a lock LRM or Streak Missiles would act as Heatseeking missiles that receive a lock before firing and maintain that throughout the flight on their own. I'm using current day military comparisons here (hope they are accurate, not an air force guy myself). The only thing after that is that LRMs can get indirect locks from friendlies, making them capable of indirect fire.

For Clarity -

Standard SRM - Point at target and fire - the missile locks the target in flight. Better aim = more locks/higher probability of each missile locking.

Standard SRM w/ Artemis IV - Point at target and fire - if you keep the target painted with your Artemis IV or targeting reticle, the missile follows it to the target upping your chance of a precise hit.

Streak SRM - Fires only after a full lock on is achieved, locks quickly, and almost guarantees a hit. Incompatible with Artemis IV or Indirect fire.

LRM - Option 1 - Point at target and fire, same as Standard SRM but has arming distance/longer overall range.
Option 2 - Wait for a lock. This allows you to fire indirectly if the lock is provided by a friendly, and requires less precision on your part.

LRM w/ Artemis IV - Option 1 - Same as Standard SRM w/ Artemis IV - point and fire, but if you keep on target your missiles have a better chance of a precise hit.
Option 2 - Same as non Artemis IV equipped LRM, wait for a lock and either fire directly or indirectly, but if you are direct firing your missiles can hit a tighter area if you can keep the target in the reticle.

Edited by monky, 07 May 2012 - 03:03 PM.

[Runz]

Why is this even an 'issue'? It's not an issue, it's being pedantic over definition of a term. As SRM and SSRM have been established terms which pretty much everyone involved in Battletech/Mechwarrior knows and understands how they work.

Let's just accept that within the battletech universe this is how they define missiles in the year 3049 and leave it at that rather than try to change gameplay mechanics or the name of established weaponry to satisfy the need to be 100% compliant with the Oxford English Language Dictionary shall we?

[Strum Wealh]

I generally agree with Dihm's opening post.

standard LRMs = light long-range guided missiles with a low explosive yield capable of both direct-fire and indirect-fire operations and a moderate degree of tracking, AND may be fired either with or without a weapons lock
standard SRMs = light short-range guided missiles with a high explosive yield capable only of direct-fire operations and a lower degree of tracking AND may be fired either with or without a weapons lock
Streak SRMs = light short-range guided missiles with a high explosive yield capable only of direct-fire operations and a moderate degree of tracking, AND unable to be fired without a weapons lock
Arrow IV = heavy long-range guided missiles with an extremely high explosive yield capable of both direct-fire and indirect-fire operations and a moderate degree of tracking, AND may be fired either with or without a weapons lock

standard MRMs = light medium-range unguided missiles with a moderate explosive yield capable only of direct-fire operations and a lower degree of tracking AND may be fired either with or without a weapons lock
standard rockets = lightweight one-shot weapons that fire a number of ultra-light long-range unguided rockets with a low explosive yield capable of both direct-fire and indirect-fire operations and a moderate degree of tracking, AND may be fired either with or without a weapons lock

Garth Erlam, on 07 May 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

I accept all suggestions, all criticisms, etc, but I ask you to look at the following, just an idea:
SRM lock in 3 seconds, can be fired earlier.
SRM reload time: 3 seconds
SSRM lock in 3 seconds.
SSRM reload time: 3 seconds.

What would be the point of SRMs? Even if we tweak these times, unless you're firing a salvo every second or so, and lock on times are really long, no-one would use SRMs... and then with the above changes they'd never use SSRMs.

I'm not saying SRMs will never be guided in any way (I notice no-one seems to be thinking that maybe the missile systems are incomplete because it's a beta) but consider what you're asking for here

Perhaps the lock-on time be set to one-half of the weapon's recycle/reload time?
That is, if standard SRMs recycle/reload in, say, 5.00 seconds, then it takes 2.50 seconds to achieve a lock with SRMs.
By contrast, if standard LRMs recycle/reload in, say, 7.50 seconds, then it takes 3.75 seconds to achieve a lock with LRMs.

In contrast to standard SRMs, Streak SRMs could recycle/reload in the same period of time (in this example, 5.00 seconds), but lock slightly more quickly (say, 1.50-2.00 seconds rather than 2.50 seconds), hold fire until a weapons lock is achieved (thus increasing the likelihood that all of the missiles fired will strike the target) and have better tracking...?

[Solis Obscuri]

Garth Erlam, on 07 May 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

I accept all suggestions, all criticisms, etc, but I ask you to look at the following, just an idea:
SRM lock in 3 seconds, can be fired earlier.
SRM reload time: 3 seconds
SSRM lock in 3 seconds.
SSRM reload time: 3 seconds.

What would be the point of SRMs? Even if we tweak these times, unless you're firing a salvo every second or so, and lock on times are really long, no-one would use SRMs... and then with the above changes they'd never use SSRMs.

Simple answer - SSRMs get 2s lock time, will always hit target unless they experience "terrain interference" (target running behind cover). Easy to use, very reliable results, but heavier and more expensive than SRMs.

SRMs have 1s lock time, but accuracy is RNG - very easy weapon to use, but unpredictable results.

[Sprouticus]

Garth Erlam, on 07 May 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

I accept all suggestions, all criticisms, etc, but I ask you to look at the following, just an idea:
SRM lock in 3 seconds, can be fired earlier.
SRM reload time: 3 seconds
SSRM lock in 3 seconds.
SSRM reload time: 3 seconds.

What would be the point of SRMs? Even if we tweak these times, unless you're firing a salvo every second or so, and lock on times are really long, no-one would use SRMs... and then with the above changes they'd never use SSRMs.

I'm not saying SRMs will never be guided in any way (I notice no-one seems to be thinking that maybe the missile systems are incomplete because it's a beta) but consider what you're asking for here

Again Garth, Im not assuming anything, just commenting on what I saw. (or think I saw) I have faith in your guys, just making suggestions based upon limited knowledge.

With that said, your example assumes lock time would be the only factor to differentiate Streaks from SRM's

first and foremost, the IS only has SSRM-2 in this time frame. SSRM-4 & 6 don't come into play for 8 years. that alone makes Standard SRM's useful, or at least SRM-4/6's.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/SSRM-2
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/SRM-2



Here are some other differences that you could look at or play with (use one or more of these to add differentiation):

1) I would says to start out, SRM's have an initial lock of 3-4 seconds, Streaks initial lock is 0-2 seconds. Once lock was achieved they would keep lock similar to LRM's (whcih looks to me like you just have to maintain LoS?)
2) put a miss % in for SRM's if you don't have your reticule on the target when you launch. Streaks always hit, even if your reticule is not on target. This mimics the actual use of them in canon.
3) spread Damage on SRM's similar to LRM's if your reticule is not on target. Streak-4/6's (Im assuming clan here since you have 8 years to wait for IS verisons) behave exactly the same.
4) The SSRM-2(1.5t) is 50% heavier than an SRM-2 (1t). Not nearly as big a deal as #5 below, but still something to consider. What would be better, an SSRM-2 or an SRM-4 (2t) for 0.5 tons more? I suppose that depends, which is my point.
5) The SSRM takes up a full missile mount, just like an SRM-4 or 6 does. That's a lot to sacrifice for slightly better targeting (using my model above)
6) SSRM ammo is double the cost per Sarna. I don't know if that matters much in MWO, and I an hesitant to even include a meta-game element in balance, but it exists so what the heck.
7) Depending on how ECM affects missile lock time dumb firing may still be a good option if you are really close to your target.

If you use the model I describe above:

Streak

Pro:

• Give faster lock
  
• cant miss no matter where your reticule (if you have lock)
  
• Clan SSRM4/6 perhaps don't spread if your reticule is not on target?

Con

• only available in SSRM-2 config
  
• weighs more than SRM-2
  
• uses a full mount point for a very small weapon
  
• costs more to maintain (minor)

SRM's

Pro

• weighs less than SSRM-2
  
• SRM-4/6 available for the same # of mount points and only slightly higher tonnage
  
• cheaper to maintain

con

• might miss if reticule is not on target
  
• damage may spread if reticule is not on target
  
• longer lock time

Edited by Sprouticus, 07 May 2012 - 03:02 PM.

[Orzorn]

The way I see it, SRMs could work like the Rockeye missiles do in Freespace 2. That is, they required no locking, but they did attempt to follow their target to some degree. They were point and shoot weapons.

SSRMs could be locking weapons, like we saw LRMs were, where you acquire a lock and fire them. They will attempt to follow their target to a great degree. However, the drawback is that SSRMs can NOT be fired without a lock. That's how it was in the TT, and I think that's a great way to balance them. The entire point of SSRMs was to be more efficient by almost guaranteeing a hit.

[Yeach]

SRM - wire/laser guided
SSRM - fire-and-forget IR (possibly) SRM
LRM - fire-and-forget active radar (possibly) LRM

MRMs - dumb-fired rocket like

[Oderint dum Metuant]

I would think SRM's are better left unguided to simulate their erratic behavior.

Quote

[color=#000000]Unlike a standard SRM whose shotgun effect may result in some misses and some hits, Streak guidance gives the lighter launchers the effective average firepower of the heavier and more wasteful SRM systems, but with considerably less variation in damage effects.[/color]

Is a quote from sarna about Streak SRM's advantages over regular SRM's.
So for me there are 2 possible options to keep each unique.

A) SRM's are unguided.
B ) SRM's have lock but when fired starburst a bit like LBX Clusters and spread damage, Streak SRM's will be more accurate and not starburst.

Edited by DV^McKenna, 08 May 2012 - 08:07 AM.

[Dihm]

Garth Erlam, on 07 May 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

I accept all suggestions, all criticisms, etc, but I ask you to look at the following, just an idea:
SRM lock in 3 seconds, can be fired earlier.
SRM reload time: 3 seconds
SSRM lock in 3 seconds.
SSRM reload time: 3 seconds.

What would be the point of SRMs? Even if we tweak these times, unless you're firing a salvo every second or so, and lock on times are really long, no-one would use SRMs... and then with the above changes they'd never use SSRMs.

I'm not saying SRMs will never be guided in any way (I notice no-one seems to be thinking that maybe the missile systems are incomplete because it's a beta) but consider what you're asking for here

Those look like perfect numbers that can be tweaked and adjusted.

Also, knowing that it's alpha/beta is exactly why we're making suggestions NOW.

There's some great ideas here, hopefully they help you guys Garth!

[AlanEsh]

Another way to differentiate SRM from SSRM -- make the SRM missiles much less maneuverable. The devs can control the degrees/second at which these things turn easily enough.

I won't be using SRMs if they are unguided, unless something very unusual happens to gameplay to make them as useful as lasers. I love the idea of mixing up my weapons, but I'm not going to gimp myself with ammo-burdened weapons that are slower than other direct fire weapons and thus much more likely to miss.

Edited by Angelicon, 08 May 2012 - 08:46 AM.

[canned wolf]

There are literally hundreds of ways to address this issue.

SRM's could be semiactive, meaning you have to maintain your lock until the missle hits, or they lose guidance and miss. They could be beam riding, which means they actually look back at the mech that fired them and ride a laser to the target. This makes jamming harder, but tends to be less accurate. They could be heat seeking, meaning that the more heat the enemy generates the better the lock you get.

Battletech missles are crap. That's why the ranges are so short and why you fire so many. I suggest the devs mess around with flight sims, especially those that include Vietnam era planes, since thats the impression i've always gotten from btech missles.

DCS Blackshark and A10 will give you some good data on anti vehicle weapons. If you don't have time to actually learn those sims, youtube has plenty of videos that show how weapons are employed.