Something I always wanted from OTA was some other kind of long range sensor: On land you only have LOS/cloaking + radar/jammers.
I have ideas for extra sensor types plus slightly different handling of all sensors (sonar/radar/sight).
The main idea with this is to give a bit more variety in the gameplay than just radar+jammers.
Extra sensors: siesmic + audio sensors.
Audio sensors would pick up on the sounds of weapons firing, but don't track targets like radar does. Can't pick up target if target isn't firing.
Siesmic sensors pick up tremors in the earth due to vehicle/k-bot movements. Can't pick up target if target isn't moving.
OK, here's the real deal: the new way to handle sensors is this: make the detection range dependent on target size, so you can get line of sight on a Krogoth from a long way away (assuming there are no hills in the way), but you don't see a flea till it's close.
Similarly with radar, each unit has a "stealth" rating. The higher the stealth rating, the closer it has to be before you can pick it up on radar.
With siesmics, k-bots are easier to pick up because of their footfalls, but basically anything big is going to make more waves, so a big tank would be detectable at a longer range than a small k-bot like an AK.
With acoustics, bigger guns can be detected at larger ranges - so e.g. LRPCs will stand out at long range.
The main idea with this is to give a bit more variety in the gameplay than just radar+jammers.
Cheers
Munch
Advanced sensors/detection
Moderator: Moderators
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
It is an interesting idea, although I think many people may be opposed to it because it is very different.
How do you intend to portray such a "Seizmic" reading visually?
For me, this is the exact solution I was grasping after in the thread regarding aircraft spotting when I said that a "new radar system was needed" that was based more around vague knowledge of where enemy units are, rather than exact radar "signatures" which can be targetted.
How do you intend to portray such a "Seizmic" reading visually?
For me, this is the exact solution I was grasping after in the thread regarding aircraft spotting when I said that a "new radar system was needed" that was based more around vague knowledge of where enemy units are, rather than exact radar "signatures" which can be targetted.
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
His suggestion is complicated, but it can be adapted.
Consider for example, that radars don't detect signatures, but rather seismic activity and sound (all radars do that).
Then, instead of showing dots outside your LOS, you are shown a light shade showing the presence of seismic activity and noise, which in turns shows you where units are, without giving away exact information. Then you could make it that units sitting still don't produce any seismic activity, adding a new level to strategy. Buildings wouldn't produce much activity if they are inert, and would produce low activity when working (Except for factories), but this would be offset by the ghost function, and would lend further importance to regular scouting.
It is very different, for sure, and it may not work, but it's worth discussion.
Consider for example, that radars don't detect signatures, but rather seismic activity and sound (all radars do that).
Then, instead of showing dots outside your LOS, you are shown a light shade showing the presence of seismic activity and noise, which in turns shows you where units are, without giving away exact information. Then you could make it that units sitting still don't produce any seismic activity, adding a new level to strategy. Buildings wouldn't produce much activity if they are inert, and would produce low activity when working (Except for factories), but this would be offset by the ghost function, and would lend further importance to regular scouting.
It is very different, for sure, and it may not work, but it's worth discussion.
With the motion detection radar, the answer is pretty obvious to how it should be represented. A simple blip and a ├óÔé¼┼ôping├óÔé¼┬Ø (as in Aliens) would make for a atmospheric effect and a good representation of what is out their. Also the motion detector should ├óÔé¼┼ôblur├óÔé¼┬Ø their detections, so that a large army will just show up as one huge blob, rather then a specific amount of units. Audio detectors should be some kind of lighting effect. A good example could be in the effected area green could be light sound, no color could be simple back round sound, while orange and red would be artillery and heavy gun fire.
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
I like the idea of armies merging into a single "blur", but that might be very difficult to implement visually...
Oh, and giving radar signatures a sound effect is a very risky move. It could prove to be an excellent addition, meaning that players are able to know their radar situation using their hearing sense, freeing up their vision for other matters. However, the sound couldn't occur constantly, and couldn't be grating. It would be very hard to stop the sound from being irritating.
For example, you would only make the noise if a new radar signature was detected, etc. But what happens if you have a radar over the enemy base? Then it will constantly be pinging, etc.
Any thoughts on how to implement a sound for radar signatures?
Oh, and giving radar signatures a sound effect is a very risky move. It could prove to be an excellent addition, meaning that players are able to know their radar situation using their hearing sense, freeing up their vision for other matters. However, the sound couldn't occur constantly, and couldn't be grating. It would be very hard to stop the sound from being irritating.
For example, you would only make the noise if a new radar signature was detected, etc. But what happens if you have a radar over the enemy base? Then it will constantly be pinging, etc.
Any thoughts on how to implement a sound for radar signatures?
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
I think getting the GUI right would maybe be the hardest bit, but sure at the simplest level, why not just present siesmic/audio info on the minimap the same way as radar info. Only difference is that they're temporary blips that dissappear when a unit stops firing/moving. If you wanted to show reduced accuracy, maybe you could draw a large fuzzy blob on the radar instead of just a blip. Having said that though, I see no reason why the size of minimap "blips" (and blips on the main map too) shouldn't be relative to the detected size of the target.SinbadEV wrote:I think that you could have blips fade as stuff as radar coverage wanes.
The original motivation for this idea is to counter that thing where both players get porced up to the eyeballs with jammers covering everything, and just send aircraft to scout for LRPCs in yet another long range shooting match.
I'm thinking that radar are too powerful to have right from the start and maybe audio/siesmic sensors would be the cheap ones built by the comm, level 1 con, with radar being expensive and/or built exclusively by level 2 con. Though gameplay testing may show the oppositte!
Munch
-
TotalAnnihilator
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 27 Apr 2005, 21:16
-
TARevenger
- Posts: 111
- Joined: 23 Jan 2005, 00:09
with terrian blocking radar signals, a hilly map like mars (small version which is installed with the full installer) using radar is pretty much pointless, unless with a radar plane.
having seismic sensors would be useful on those types of maps and it would only detect earthquakes, large masses of units moving (20+ maybe), and maybe the krogoth.
having seismic sensors would be useful on those types of maps and it would only detect earthquakes, large masses of units moving (20+ maybe), and maybe the krogoth.
Wow - you're right! Cool =)Nemo wrote:put a radar in a low spot on a hilly map and press L
the green area is where you have real radar coverage, the other colors are limited/no coverage
Well that makes the mods I suggested more open then: If we're changing radar coverage anyway, why not make detection distance relative to target size? (you can detect Krogs a mile off but fleas only when they get close)?
Munch
On a hilly map like RedHaven, it makes hills a much better emplacment for radars, which adds some interesting strategy element.TARevenger wrote:with terrian blocking radar signals, a hilly map like mars (small version which is installed with the full installer) using radar is pretty much pointless, unless with a radar plane.
-
monohouse
*YEAH DUUUDE* definetly, amazing idea - got for it !
I made some suggestion about radar levels, as in overlaping radar areas that show more info and/or give better targeting and/or los when radars are more covered (same with jammers), but this ? this is totally amazing, much better I think, I say yeah, not should, MUST be :)
I made some suggestion about radar levels, as in overlaping radar areas that show more info and/or give better targeting and/or los when radars are more covered (same with jammers), but this ? this is totally amazing, much better I think, I say yeah, not should, MUST be :)