We have radar, so...

Ideas and suggestions for how to improve the Warzone 2100 base game only. Ideas for mods go in Mapping/Modding instead. Read sticky posts first!

We have radar, so...

Postby heatwave » 03 Sep 2009, 01:46

Why not Radar Jammers? It would render enemies within said tower (and/or mobile
turret) invisible to radar. Upgrades would shield against different types of radar, or increase it's range.

Radar Jammers would not render your tanks/borgs invisible to enemy tanks/borgs. If a live enemy sees you, you'll show up on the mini map.

Best usage would be for sneaking your forces past sensor tower "outposts" that your opponent placed in case you launch an offensive. Without a mobile Radar Jammer, your advancing forces would be seen, and by the time you get there, your opponent is ready for you. It could also be useful for sneaking past an array of mortars or other such artillery.

Perhaps when a Mobile Radar Jammer is heavily damaged, it's power (radius) is decreased?
User avatar
heatwave
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 60
Joined: 02 Jan 2009, 04:48
Location: Wisconsin

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby elio » 03 Sep 2009, 16:57

take a look at #340 (work in progress)
elio
Regular
Regular
 
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby stiv » 03 Sep 2009, 18:04

VTOLS armed with bunker busters make effective radar jammers.
stiv
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
 
Posts: 876
Joined: 18 Jul 2008, 04:41
Location: 45N 86W

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby psychopompos » 03 Sep 2009, 19:45

excellent!! :twisted:

does this mean we might be getting individual counter detection ratings for different classes?
heavy tanks=normal light tanks= medium borgs=high (making borgs less likly to be seen on radar anyway)

what about communication jammers? making you loose contact with tanks if you dont have a vehicle/structure to act as relay.
User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby heatwave » 05 Sep 2009, 04:56

elio wrote:take a look at #340 (work in progress)

Yeah, I've seen that in-game, but I'd rather it "knock out" enemy sensors instead of just reveal them.
Granted, it's handy to know where your enemy has placed their sensors, but if you wanna sneak through, you're going to have to send some kind of unit in to destroy the tower. And if you do that, your opponent will know something's up.

Often times, I'll be attending to my base when my mortars suddenly fire the edge of the screen (and off the screen) somewhere. Obviously, there are enemies advancing.

If my opponent was using a radar jammer, my mortars wouldn't fire (until they were in the range of a mortar un-aided by a sensor tower) and the element of surprise would have been maintained for much longer. It's those extra seconds of stealth that I'm asking for.
User avatar
heatwave
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 60
Joined: 02 Jan 2009, 04:48
Location: Wisconsin

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Zarel » 05 Sep 2009, 05:22

heatwave wrote:Yeah, I've seen that in-game, but I'd rather it "knock out" enemy sensors instead of just reveal them.
Granted, it's handy to know where your enemy has placed their sensors, but if you wanna sneak through, you're going to have to send some kind of unit in to destroy the tower. And if you do that, your opponent will know something's up.

I don't think you understand. The radar detector is only one part of #340; it also implements ECMs (radar jammers); it's just that the ECM part isn't done yet.
User avatar
Zarel
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5770
Joined: 03 Jan 2008, 23:35
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Serman » 05 Sep 2009, 05:56

Why not make a radar jammer in the form of a shootable turret that works like the Command Turret and the Nexus Link (except far longer range)

The system does no damage at all, and has no visible tracers; but the sensor/sensor tower that's being shot at stops transmitting. Artillery that is assigned to said sensor tower will no longer be able to fire. Also, there should be a certain amount of time that the sensor tower stays disabled even after the Jammer stops firing, or after the Jammer is destroyed.
User avatar
Serman
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 244
Joined: 25 May 2007, 03:54
Location: New York City

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Per » 05 Sep 2009, 11:57

Serman wrote:Why not make a radar jammer in the form of a shootable turret that works like the Command Turret and the Nexus Link (except far longer range)

The system does no damage at all, and has no visible tracers; but the sensor/sensor tower that's being shot at stops transmitting. Artillery that is assigned to said sensor tower will no longer be able to fire. Also, there should be a certain amount of time that the sensor tower stays disabled even after the Jammer stops firing, or after the Jammer is destroyed.

It is a neat idea, but all the opponent has to do to counter it is to build more sensor towers, and hope you don't see them all in time. And they are really cheap to build. Besides, it assumes that you see the sensor tower before it sees you. Since you may not want to drag your own sensor tower with you when you attack by stealth (since it would be seen by a radar detector), chances are big you'd be seen long before you saw their sensor.
Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
 
Posts: 3720
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Kacen » 05 Sep 2009, 20:09

The problem with this is that in Warzone, like in most RTS games (the only exception I can think of is Supreme Commander), sight and radar are the same, essentially.

So how will you make sure only "radar" doesn't see it? As it stands now, a sensor tower only increases your sight range and acts as a designator for artillery. The only advantage I can see this having is making you "invisible to artillery", or something. That is unless we revamp the radar system...which would seriously effect the game. I know that when units are just within range they appear as simply flashing green beacons but that's in a very small spot in between "unseen" and "seen"; it's not like say Supcom.
Kacen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 294
Joined: 19 Feb 2007, 19:28

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby heatwave » 05 Sep 2009, 21:33

Zarel wrote:I don't think you understand.

You're quite right. I didn't understand. Glad to see it's in the works.
User avatar
heatwave
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 60
Joined: 02 Jan 2009, 04:48
Location: Wisconsin

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Per » 05 Sep 2009, 21:45

Kacen wrote:The problem with this is that in Warzone, like in most RTS games (the only exception I can think of is Supreme Commander), sight and radar are the same, essentially.

So how will you make sure only "radar" doesn't see it? As it stands now, a sensor tower only increases your sight range and acts as a designator for artillery. The only advantage I can see this having is making you "invisible to artillery", or something. That is unless we revamp the radar system...which would seriously effect the game. I know that when units are just within range they appear as simply flashing green beacons but that's in a very small spot in between "unseen" and "seen"; it's not like say Supcom.

I think Pumpkin originally envisioned sight as being a basic sensor with fixed, limited range. On top of that you had radar, which could be jammed with ECM. However, you could never jam sight, so there would not be the kind of total invisibility that you can see in some other games. This never got completely implemented, though. I want to finish it one day, but have to come up with good algorithms to avoid this becoming a horrible CPU drain.
Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
 
Posts: 3720
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Kacen » 05 Sep 2009, 22:20

Per wrote:I think Pumpkin originally envisioned sight as being a basic sensor with fixed, limited range. On top of that you had radar, which could be jammed with ECM. However, you could never jam sight, so there would not be the kind of total invisibility that you can see in some other games. This never got completely implemented, though. I want to finish it one day, but have to come up with good algorithms to avoid this becoming a horrible CPU drain.

You'd have to make sensors have a radar and sight range, like in supcom, and have ECM/stealth only work in the radar covered areas.

Units in radar covered areas should only be designated by the green pulses, you won't be able to tell what type of unit it is, only if it's a VTOL or not. Radar range should be much greater than standard sight.

If this can be implemented it would be great, more RTS games need realistic radar like Supcom...it seems WZ2100 was almost there.
Kacen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 294
Joined: 19 Feb 2007, 19:28

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Per » 05 Sep 2009, 22:41

Kacen wrote:You'd have to make sensors have a radar and sight range, like in supcom, and have ECM/stealth only work in the radar covered areas.

Wasn't that what I just said?
Kacen wrote:Units in radar covered areas should only be designated by the green pulses, you won't be able to tell what type of unit it is, only if it's a VTOL or not.

No, I think Supreme Commander showed that this is not a good idea. It is very "realistic", but it is not fun to not know what you are blowing to pieces.
Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
 
Posts: 3720
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Kacen » 05 Sep 2009, 23:05

Per wrote:Wasn't that what I just said?

You were relatively vague.

Per wrote:No, I think Supreme Commander showed that this is not a good idea. It is very "realistic", but it is not fun to not know what you are blowing to pieces.

I never found an issue with it, though I never thought of it in Warzone.

Thing is if we can identify units by radar then the only time the difference between radar and sight shows is when stealth/ECM is being used.

Dunno, I find realism fun. Overly unrealistic stuff severely throws me off. Also what use would the green pulses be that are -already- in the game?
Kacen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 294
Joined: 19 Feb 2007, 19:28

Re: We have radar, so...

Postby Zarel » 06 Sep 2009, 03:32

Kacen wrote:Dunno, I find realism fun. Overly unrealistic stuff severely throws me off. Also what use would the green pulses be that are -already- in the game?

They're red. ;)
User avatar
Zarel
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5770
Joined: 03 Jan 2008, 23:35
Location: Minnesota, USA

Next

Return to Ideas and suggestions