[Suggestion] Implant: Early Warning Receiver

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Insignus, Aug 11, 2017.

  1. Insignus

    What it does

    Projects a translucent flashing red cone in the general direction of an enemy lock-on launcher, as it is locking on to you.
    Who would use it

    Any vehicle driver or pilot who wants to know where to "return to sender" for a lock-on missile.
    Is it Upgradeable?

    Rank 1 projects a very wide angle - almost 90 degrees, so it'll give you a quadrant.
    Each rank up to five progressively reduces it, until the final rank, which is 15 degrees.
    Ok, how would they do it?

    The mechanic uses code modified from that currently used to project the death screen cone, which appears on the minimap in your death screen giving you a rough approximation of where you were shot from, as well as a similar visual aesthetic.
    Is it OP?

    No, as it does not affect damage or actual awareness - implant or not, the pilot/driver will always know that they're being targeted by a launcher.

    The difference is, they will have stronger visual indications of where they are being targeted from, which will let them either plan better escape routes, or go offensive and target the launcher more effectively.
    It will still be counter-able by launcher teams, who will be able to flood the zone from multiple angles.
    Frequency

    Uncommon.


    What are y'alls thoughts?
    • Up x 3
  2. Kcalehc

    No.

    Equip flares, hit F to win.

    You also already know where they fire from, once the rocket is launched.
    • Up x 4
  3. UberNoob1337101

    Sounds good, it's unique, practical yet effective, but not too effective and one can say that minimaps do the job already, but there's one problem : it's an implant.

    Can't wait to yet again throw tens of thousands of certs at the RNG lootbox system only to get 40000000000 implants I already have and 2 new ones I don't care about. If only I could buy the stuff I want...
    • Up x 1
  4. Demigan

    One of the more reasonable proposals. It doesnt pinpoint locations, it telegraphs a bit longer than the missile itself and it tells you what any half-decent player should already know: its going to be at the nearest spawnpoint.

    But if you start adding such implants you need to add some for other vehicles as well. This one is primarily for aircraft and ground vehicles wont need it much.
    • Up x 1
  5. BCAW

    Liking this idea. Also, a proposal for a "final rank bonus":

    At max rank, missiles homing on you have their own engagement radar icon on your hud. Think engagement radar icon for enemy aircrafts, but for missile.

    For the sake of fairness, ground vehicles without engagement radar get this icon too.
  6. Insignus



    I think that with the range changes they're making to vehicles, vehicle on vehicle fire is going to get closer in, which wouldn't render it as effective if we had something like "Connective Armor Sensors" which would do essentially the same thing for enemy rounds, although it might be useful against people at long range.

    The EWR implant I'm proposing could, with heavy software tweaking, be allowed to trigger for larger primary weapons - such as tank rounds, principally.



    I like the concept, but unfortunately, I think that would be too much of a stretch, as it would involve jumping down deeper into the code and classifying how missiles are treated by the game - currently, engagement radar works based on detecting the vehicle and type. I'm not sure if they could track missiles without hacking up the code on how the game tracks missiles.

    It's clearly doing it, mind you, because its got the red dots on the minimap. But translating that into a HUD icon might be a bit much, and once launched they are pretty fast, and knowing precisely where they are in flight doesn't always help you dodge them like it does in other more realistic games, as the tracking logic is extremely precise.

    No one uses flares, mostly because of how long the cooldown is. While we do know where missiles fire from once they are launched, given how precise the tracking logic on non-swarm missiles is, and how fast they are, knowing that makes dodging highly dependent on circumstance, as opposed to skill.

    This implant would give pilots more time to plan and react to missiles, and would create a situation in which future pilot complaints about missiles being OP would be largely voided. They'd still make them, but you'd have a showstopping counter argument.

    Also, the way the lock-on time reduction mechanic works, based on range, the implant effectiveness would be dramatically reduced or even negligible at extremely close ranges, because the display time would be minimal. What would primarily be effected is what pilots generally complain about - long and extreme range AA, but would not reduce the power or effectiveness of the launcher - merely introduce an information parity between launcher and target, at an opportunity cost to the pilot (It'd have to take the place of ammo printer or safe fall, two common pilot implants).
  7. Kristan

    Why not. This could be real and doesn't give much of combat advantage. As far as I know at most of jet fighters there is system that indicates from where you're being followed by radar, especially by anti-air complex radar.
  8. Campagne

    No one uses flares because Fire Suppression is so overpowered on aircraft. With flares however, one can become almost entirely invulnerable to lock-ons in combination with Stealth and the inherent flaws of the lock-on launchers themselves, of which there are many.

    Regardless though, I don't have anything against your idea but I fail to see any practicality or usefulness over the current system, which shows the player exactly where the rocket is and where it originated from. When the average cost of a single implant is taken into account, there would be very little reason to use it.
    • Up x 3
  9. LordKrelas

    I have no issue with the Implant however:

    Yes people use Flares. Just not always.
    If you can pop them, finish your killing spree, becoming immune to every rocket launcher that isn't Dumbfire or proximity after nuking all in-flight rockets, you then simply fly off to return when the cooldown is over; Which means you have resupplied yourself with ammo most likely.

    ---
    Other than that, I do actually like your Implant after re-reading it.
    Originally I thought: Oh joy, lock-on literally tells the pilot where to see the LOS-Required Heavy, and the heavy dies.

    But it's not like that.
    It's a lot more practical of an Implant; It has uses, counters, and isn't the All-seeing eye.
    Aka, Good work.



    --- But seriously, we need a better system than the RNG boxes of Hell.
    Or it'll be those whom have it can use it, are those blessed by Luck.
  10. Insignus

    I had that concern as well, that it'd be a big giant kill me sign, which is why it should always be a cone, and even then have a mininum slice. Obviously if the launcher is 50 meters away, they are going to be in the cone enough that you'll have a really strong idea of where they are based on how long it takes to lock-on (If I hear the tone and it pops off half a second later, they are generally right under me). But if they're that close, you aren't going to have much time to dodge anyway.

    At the more medium and longer ranges, even the smallest cross-section will be plenty big, just as a function of geometry.

    And thank you, I do try :D






    I'll give you an example.

    I'm flying at mid-height on esamir, along a river. I hear the lock-on tone. It could be coming from either side, but I'm on the right bank. There are some mountains nearby that jut out into the river. I might be able to dodge behind them. I've got at most 4 seconds to decide.

    I look at my minimap for .25 seconds, see the cone, and realize "Oh, those mountains I want to dodge behind, its on the otherside, ahead of me. I need to pull up short and dodge left to put the mountain in my way."

    So now I have a more informed plan on how to dodge the missile. Whether I actually do is between me, the launcher, and the missile. I may not be able to pull that dodge off in time, or the missile might just shave the mountainside, and arc down into me.

    But I'll be executing a plan based purely upon my informed reactions, not frantically flailing around for the nearest obstacle for the first 2 seconds of the missiles flight time. Now I have a chance to actually effectively dodge, based on my judgement and reactions as a pilot, and not so much on random chance.
    • Up x 1
  11. Pelojian

    aircraft already have an easy enough time against rockets and locating the person that fired it and then come around for another pass to torch to the heavy.

    you have speed, high dps weapons, can have 2 weapons at your disposal in an ESF, have inbuilt afterburner and engagement radar and you can equip flares.

    why should an implant replace a vehicle ability slot?

    as soon as a missile is fired you know where it comes from, if you really are a good player you will think out which ways you can evade missiles before you start your attack run.

    good reflexes is a good thing to have in shooter games, yet why is it so bad that you should need quick thinking in a fast moving vehicle?

    even someone like me that rarely pilots and when i do i use them as fast transports not combat vehicles, can evade a lockon with a stock ESF.

    ESFs and air in general already hold too many cards over ground units while infantry whine about all vehicles and instead of balancing air they chain nerf ground vehicles then we might see a buff or two then have them stripped away because infantryside whines about not wanting to use combined arms and behaves like they are rambo.

    TLDR if you get hit by a lock-on it's not because there is a balance problem, it's because you are not perfect or untouchable by ground units. if you want to avoid lock-ons 100% equip flares.
  12. LordKrelas

    While I hate aircraft, I can't see why an implant that gives a generalized cone towards the firing source is that bad.
    The data is already provided, but with better accuracy today; With the cone, as well, Lock-ons can be considered less-plague, allowing them to be altered without any objection about any stealth of it.

    The cone also allows, easier data overload of the targeted aircraft equipped with it.
    Fire from enough locations, say 3, and they can not locate a single source, let alone dodge.
    Add in overlap, and nothing will seem safe, even if in truth, there is a hundred & one ways to dodge it.

    Aircraft are powerful, fast, and gods of the sky.
    Lock-ons, are not that functional to begin with, This mostly helps & only if the pilot has time, and ability to use the data.
    To kill with a Lock-on, you usually have someone unable to dodge in that situation anyway.

    After all, the implant won't kill Lock-ons, just as Lock-ons don't kill aircraft all that well.
    Implants are potent, would you rather the enemy be able to equip this in the slot, and have two enhancements as well?
    Or to choose limited aircraft capabilities, with only one implant left to use in addition.

    It costs the pilot more, if it's an implant.
    Not only in Expensive ISO, RNG, but also in powers available at once.
    Only so many slots have value in an aircraft, but implants are two slots of power.
    Once it ejects, lands, or crashes, any implant tailored for flight just became useless.
  13. Pelojian

    the information is already there, it's called checking the minimap. this is just a thermals 2.0 that only highlights people countering the aircraft with lock ons. aircraft do not need any buffs direct or indirect. they are powerful enough already.

    if a pilot ejects their flight based implant may be useless but they can easily redeploy, just like other vehicle users and swap to a different loadout.

    if a pilot wants to evade lock ons they should pay some attention to their mini map when they get the lock on warning to see where it is fired from so they can evade and make another pass to hit the heavy in question.

    why should aircraft have an easier time of locating their counters? this would be like an implant for infiltrators that highlights enemy soldiers that have a weapon with darklight attached.

    if an infiltrator sees someone with a darklight on and actively searching, the infiltrator doesn't move around and gets discovered it's their fault, the same goes for aircraft warned about someone locking on to them.
  14. LordKrelas

    That's what I just said.

    Thermals showed the exact position from further away than any Thermal scope available on infantry & land vehicles.
    This shows a cone of the direction the missile came from when fired.
    This also isn't aircraft specific, it works for land vehicles as well.

    Yeah, but it also means they have an entire implant for piloting, rather than any other implant.
    Means they also must fight RNG for it, spend ISO on it, and even then have 1 of their implants slotted into it at all times during flight.
    Implant slots are more valuable than any standard slot of a vehicle.

    There is something like that: Called the darklight itself! lol.

    The implant doesn't affect lock-on warnings, or help beyond a cone of firing position when the missile was fired.
    It is data. Data alone.
    The auto-spotting implant is far more dangerous.
  15. Insignus


    Not to be rude, but your darklight example is pretty off base, and infantry already have implants that accomplish similar purposes. Also, Darklights already highlight themselves to infiltrators - its called be obnoxiously visible.

    Both of your replies don't really seem to address the suggestion itself, and instead seem like a kneejerk "Aircraft are OP and kill me, anything that benefits them must therefore be horrible and wrong."

    This implant suggestion is specifically designed to handle your specific type of objection, but not providing any form of direct or indirect power nerf. It is solely an informational tool to increase the pilots ability to plan and respond to threats, not directly address said threats. It provides approximate information only, and it works on aircraft and ground vehicles.

    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about redeploying and changing loadouts is.
    • Up x 1
  16. FateJH

    I forget right now. Is it still possible to stunt any sort of aerial lock-on by pointing your nose at the ground?
  17. Insignus

    It is not, however, R3 Swarmers are notoriously worthless, both in damage and primarily in guidance. If you descend to 10m, the hit percentage goes down dramatically, and you can even force them to time out or track into terrain if you run your loops properly.

    This isn't really a function of the air vehicles, mind you, just that it is a really, really, really poorly designed launcher.

    Its just bad. When people ask for launcher recommendations, I explicitly tell them to never buy swarms. When people launch swarms at me, I am generally obligated to come back and run them over, because I view it as an annoying insult that wastes everyone's time, not a legitimate threat to be respected. Launchers vs. Aircraft is supposed to be a fight, a challenge, a test of skill and wits.

    Whatever wit the launcher of Swarms has is negated completely by how stupid the missiles are. The faster their futility is demonstrated, the sooner they will buy an Annie and make things fun. Truly the best G2A launcher.