Indirect Fire Skill

[LarkinVB]

I'm thinking about giving indirect fire skill some impact for non missile ballistic weapons. Any ideas ? Currently I'm thinking about limiting the move speed and dodge penalty, being modified by indirect fire skill of the shooter. Not a bad idea but I'm not very pleased with this as it will render recons more useless (their only advantage is their speed while being shot at). I can raise the speed penalty to compensate but this will make ranged rookie recon battles harder, they are already close combat dominated as rookies can hardly hit a moving recon as of now.

Does it make any sense for giving some range bonus if shooting with lasers/cannons while being linked to a squad buddy closer to the target based on indirect fire skill ?

I'm open to suggestions. Cannons/lasers should not be allowed to shoot enemies only visible indirect (x) as missiles do, of course.

[Goblin]

Larkin,

I'll take a stab at this. It seems logical that a friendly unit with a good scan on an enemy, and closer to the enemy than another unit, could feed its ally's targeting comp better data. But the game plays well as is.

One caveat - I don't have any clue how to use indirect fire. I've tried scanner link with closer units, but it always says 2% regardless of my units Indirect Fire skill. I'm obviously doing something wrong, so I may not be the guy to give an opinion on this...[:D]

[LarkinVB]

One caveat - I don't have any clue how to use indirect fire. I've tried scanner link with closer units, but it always says 2% regardless of my units Indirect Fire skill. I'm obviously doing something wrong, so I may not be the guy to give an opinion on this...[:D]

Indirect fire has two uses :

1. Being able to fire at targets which are only visible indirectly (X) or linked (L). The formula for the penalty is

Guided missiles : (35 - Indirect Fire Skill/3) * 2
Unguided missles : (35 - Indirect Fire Skill/3) * 4

Example : With indirect fire skill 60 the penalty for firing guided missiles is 30%.

2. Long range missiles will get the range modifiers of a linked partner if the link partner is closer to the enemy, not in minimum range and an indirect fire skill check is passed by the shooter.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB
I'm open to suggestions. Cannons/lasers should not be allowed to shoot enemies only visible indirect (x) as missiles do, of course.

Well, I could, with a very substancial amount of handwaving and goodwill, accept that cannons could fire indirect, but lasers?! [X(] [;)]

[LarkinVB]

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB
I'm open to suggestions. Cannons/lasers should not be allowed to shoot enemies only visible indirect (x) as missiles do, of course.

Well, I could, with a very substancial amount of handwaving and goodwill, accept that cannons could fire indirect, but lasers?! [X(] [;)]

Therefore I'm looking for other suggestions to give indirect skill some impact for cannons/lasers which isn't too far fetched.

[Goblin]

If I understand correctly, you wish to allow the indirect fire skill to add a small bonus to a friendly, linked unit (the bonus coming from the closer linked unit) who has a direct shot on the target, not actually indirect as Thorgrim interpreted.

Basically, the closer unit would 'call fire' for the further unit, as long as the further unit had direct LOS with cannons/lasers on the target. "You're hitting the left torso!! Drift the beam to the right!"

I like the idea. Maybe something super simple would work? Indirect Fire skill/20 as a bonus? This means that someone will only give the bonus as they start to get fairly accomplished at the skill, and it won't top +5%. Since crouching and other modifiers for terrain or whatever add a fairly small bouns, this seems inline with these other modifiers, won't unbalance play, but will be desirable (I'll take any +% to hit that I can get!). It also provides a reason to link where it may just be skipped by units further away.



Goblin

[Judge_Omega]

How about allowing indirect fire to have a greater chance of hitting units when targeting a hex? So when you got a low to hit on a target you could instead just spray down the entire hex. 'spray and pray'

[Judge_Omega]

And as a side note i think locking a hex should be really fast.

[Thorgrim]

Yep, sorry, I misread your post.  [:o]
 
You've decreased the scan time when linked with this latest version of the 1.2.2 patch, right? How about keeping it as it was, and making the indirect skill decreased it? Something like a skill/5 reduction, which would make a 100% skill reduce time to 1.2; 1.3 should be skill around 70%. Seems fairly reasonable IMO.

[Thorgrim]

Of course, that has nothing to do with cannons/lasers...  [:D]
I was thinking about it being for targets in indirect LoS, but that'd mean that it'd possibly be faster to scan these than those in direct... unless this could be balanced, I really don't know. Just ignore the suggestion.

[Thorgrim]

Ok, how about this. This time for lasers/cannons (only)  [:D]
 
The skill could decrease the LoS effect of smoke/steam and even burning woods - the Jock would be better able to predict where its target is (req attribs are Instinct and Intelligence).
It could also decrease ToHit penalties for targets being in woods or immersed.
 
This wouldn't work for missiles, because they're not direct fire weapons.
That's about all I could think of.

[LarkinVB]

Thanks. Sounds interesting. Will think about it.

EDIT:

1.2.2i released with changes for this skill.

[Thorgrim]

Here's another thought. Not much of an impact in the game though, I guess.
Energy weapons (including the FT) could deal no damage to immersed titans (since they already create steam, energy is dissipated on contact with the water) - except the BRG (normal damage), and the EMP and NB.
Other weapon types would deal damage, but maybe reduced amounts (half or something) - except HtH attacks, not available to be used.

[LarkinVB]

Here's another thought. Not much of an impact in the game though, I guess.

I didn't face an immersed titan for years.

[gazra]

I can raise the speed penalty to compensate but this will make ranged rookie recon battles harder, they are already close combat dominated as rookies can hardly hit a moving recon as of now.

This is true. I can remember my rookie squad being so poor at hitting enemy Titans with their ranged weapons that I had to exclusively use close-combat weapons instead.

Does it make any sense for giving some range bonus if shooting with lasers/cannons while being linked to a squad buddy closer to the target based on indirect fire skill?

No, it makes no sense what-so-ever because the Titan firing the lasers/cannons has an unobstructed line-of-sight to the target, so the Titan would not gain any benefit by having a spotter (or radar vehicle, or infantry painting the target with a laser beam) who was closer to the target because lasers/cannons are not guided weapons. The only factors that would affect whether a laser/cannon hits the target would be:
1. the range of the target from the attacker
2. the quality of the fire control system of the attacking vehicle (i.e. the targeting system)
3. the velocity of the target
4. the velocity of the attacker
5. wind velocity
6. the muzzle speed of the cannon shell/slug
7. the condition of the attacking weapon (i.e. whether it is in perfect working order or the extent of damage that the weapon has sustained)
8. the skill of the attacking vehicle's crew at targeting and firing weapons

I'm thinking about giving indirect fire skill some impact for non missile ballistic weapons. Currently I'm thinking about limiting the move speed and dodge penalty, being modified by indirect fire skill of the shooter. Not a bad idea but I'm not very pleased with this as it will render recons more useless (their only advantage is their speed while being shot at). Any ideas? I'm open to suggestions. Cannons/lasers should not be allowed to shoot enemies only visible indirect (x) as missiles do, of course.

I disagree. If you are going to allow unguided missiles to fire indirectly at enemy targets (either visible indirectly (X) or linked (L), as is currently the case) then, not only should cannons also be able to fire indirectly at enemy targets, but cannons should also have a much better chance of hitting targets indirectly than unguided missiles do, because cannons have a much higher muzzle speed and a much more accurate ballistic trajectory than unguided missiles because unguided missiles:
1. launch much slower
2. spin much slower
3. have a much lower mass to surface area ratio
4. leave the barrel (or launch rail) at a much less accurate initial trajectory
5. are more affected by air resistance and the wind.

I don't know what you have against cannons being able to fire indirectly at targets. In reality, artillery rarely fires directly at targets because the artillery crew is incredibly vulnerable to enemy weapons fire! Artillery can fire reasonably accurately at any coordinates that they are given by infantry due to the accurate ballistic trajectories of cannon shells and the fact that range tables are calculated for artillery beforehand.

[Thorgrim]

Cannons in ToS are autocannons, not artillery pieces.

BTW Larkin, you've got #s 36 and 37 twice in the changes log