HAWKEN servers are up and our latest minor update is live!
Forgot Password_ SUPPORT REDEEM CODE

Jump to content


On radar jammers


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

Poll: You like this idea_ (87 member(s) have cast votes)

You like this idea_

  1. Perhaps (25 votes [33.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.78%

  2. Yes (44 votes [59.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 59.46%

  3. Not (5 votes [6.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.76%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted February 20 2012 - 01:47 PM

What if one or more mech classes might use some sort of radar jammering_...

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#2 Naraklok

Naraklok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted February 20 2012 - 04:12 PM

Radar jamming_! I'd support it.
Naraklok

#3 FlyorDie

FlyorDie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted February 20 2012 - 05:48 PM

I think it'd depend on how it would be used. If used without balancing, it could quickly become a major nuisance.

#4 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted February 21 2012 - 09:46 AM

Someone might say... Shutting down your mech is the natural way to fool any other opponent radar around.

And I say... what about some special gear to generate fake radar dots around_ :D

Edit: Maybe if that supposed radar jamming device would have an efficiency of 69% or so.. that would subsequently mean that a mech can not be completely invisible to the radar...

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#5 BrainBox

BrainBox

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • LocationEverywhere and nowhere.

Posted February 21 2012 - 04:00 PM

How important would radar be in game_ If it is essential for survival, it would have to be balanced very well to work. If it is more of a convenience, then sure, several classes should have the ability.
"Of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing can ever be made."
-Immanuel Kant

#6 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted February 28 2012 - 02:52 AM

Maybe. I mean one tactic I loved in chrome hounds was a big old mech to take hits, while a lighter mech with HUGE amounts of damage potential went around to an advantageous position and just wrecked em. Tank and assassin. A match made in heaven. In MW terms, it's be like an Atlas with a ton of armor, but with a standard load out, with a nova loaded out with gause. Atlas distracts, gause destroys. Sadly without radar jamming this strategy doesn't work very well as the light mech is constantly seen, gets picked off, and now the big guys SoL. So radar jamming on heavier, slower punching bag mechs would be a great idea. It would allow some interesting team comps. Two medium mechs could present a challenge, but if the tank is good enough to keep attention, then alls fair in love and death.
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#7 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted February 28 2012 - 11:00 AM

Yep. That's a good example.

According to the complexity of the geometry in the Hawken maps that you can view on the videos... I'd say that radar is quite important.

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#8 Naraklok

Naraklok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted February 28 2012 - 12:14 PM

The_Silencer said:

According to the complexity of the geometry in the Hawken maps that you can view on the videos... I'd say that radar is quite important.
I think we can all agree on that.
Naraklok

#9 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted February 28 2012 - 12:39 PM

Naraklok said:

The_Silencer said:

According to the complexity of the geometry in the Hawken maps that you can view on the videos... I'd say that radar is quite important.
I think we can all agree on that.
Seconded. So if we had radar jammers they would have to be on a smaller scale. Not map wide or anything, but maybe within a radius. Like a noise amplifier or something.
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#10 Shlitz

Shlitz

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted February 28 2012 - 01:10 PM

Reading this, I'm thinking any radar jamming should be on deploy-able devices. Like the turrets, you purchase one with points earned in game. Maybe have the jammer have a radar signature itself if balancing is an issue.
All your base are belong to us.
Day[9] made me do it!

#11 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted February 28 2012 - 02:57 PM

Shlitz said:

Reading this, I'm thinking any radar jamming should be on deploy-able devices. Like the turrets, you purchase one with points earned in game. Maybe have the jammer have a radar signature itself if balancing is an issue.

That's an interesting option too, indeed.

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#12 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted February 28 2012 - 05:55 PM

I wouldn't be to much for that, because then you have a limited use of them, and if you run out you're SoL. It wouldn't make much sense from a longevity stand point, but it is something do able.
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#13 Naraklok

Naraklok

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted February 28 2012 - 06:13 PM

Decoys anyone_
Naraklok

#14 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted February 28 2012 - 06:57 PM

Naraklok said:

Decoys anyone_
Nah decoys have always kind of been a failed tech IMO.
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#15 WeirdBall

WeirdBall

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 95 posts

Posted February 28 2012 - 07:01 PM

Not if it was a different type of decoy, like a projected image from your mech that makes it look like you have another mech following you around.

Also i doubt jammers will be implemented because of the way Hawken's radar system and map design work out. Since most areas of the map are multi-leveled and the radar shows no terrain, i would op to just go on heal mode to get off peoples radars instead of jamming their radars...
weirdball's mantra

#16 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted February 29 2012 - 09:50 AM

Weirdball said:

Not if it was a different type of decoy, like a projected image from your mech that makes it look like you have another mech following you around.

Also i doubt jammers will be implemented because of the way Hawken's radar system and map design work out. Since most areas of the map are multi-leveled and the radar shows no terrain, i would op to just go on heal mode to get off peoples radars instead of jamming their radars...
So like the halo reach decoy, that instantly gave it away because it ran directly foreward, without shooting, and without tracking, and without looking or moving the same direction you were_ OR it would follow you_
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#17 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted February 29 2012 - 10:14 AM

Any of you guys might open one new thread on decoys. IIRC, there's not any made up until now. Although fake radar dots would fit into this thread well. In case if you were aiming in that direction then I've said nothing...

Back on topic,

1.- On Deployable Stationary Jammers:

With a fair and moderate area of effect, moderately sized blueprint ( so you can not place these on unaccessible places on the map...) and making them pretty visible in order to be able of countering them... might work well from a tactical stand point.

Just to mention some..

2.- On Jammers into Mechs:

With smaller area of effect, not so efficient at jammering radar signals and even with a maximum duration of, let's say, 5 secs_.

3.- Fake radar dots:

At a first glance.. That could be crazy... Although, why not_ :D


P.S. Holograms (as visual decoys) and jammers put together on the battelfield would not be a good idea, IMHO.

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#18 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted March 01 2012 - 01:01 PM

After shutting down your mech, the enemy radar can't see you anymore. So that would has sense, IMO.

@skatcat31: Yeah, I just mentioned 5 secs in order to start the discussion. Maybe 5 seconds would be good for quick skirmishes or ambushes, even with a more efficient jammering burst during that scarce time (5 secs).

Maybe bigger toys could wear -maybe not so efficient- jammers which might emit during more time.

Stationary jammers could have a long range than their little versions put into mechs. I'd rather limit these to 1 deploy only. Also, I'd like to mention their size. IMO, stationaries should have a blueprint big enough to not be placed on unaccessible places, so to speak. This way, you might locate them with relative ease and erase them of the map.

P.S. Decoys ( visual ones, like holograms and so forth..) + jammers on the battlefield would nto be a good idea, IMHO. That would be crazy, guys!. :P

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"


#19 skatcat31

skatcat31

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • LocationRocklin, CA

Posted March 01 2012 - 01:22 PM

That would be survival mode to the extreme! Okay everyone get a decoy and a jammer and some weapons, LET DO THIS THING! *5 billion dots later* Well we're f***ed
Fanboys beware: From now on if you start doing it I will ignore the post. Fanboyism ruins conversations the same way religion, science, and politics due. We're here to fawn over hawken, not other things.

#20 The_Silencer

The_Silencer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,266 posts
  • LocationStyx.

Posted March 01 2012 - 01:49 PM

Hahahah :D

Posted Image

.

"The difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice"





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users