Battlezone Universe

Thermal Missiles do not lock onto a ship with VIR phantom! Reguardless of the 'type' of lock-on.

It may not matter to much in 1.2/1.3, where the only thermal missiles are Faf and Stinger missiles and a lock-on Hornet rocket.

But in Mods like FE this is really important.

Really important.

Also, themal missiles never used neutralized by VIR phantom in BZI. The ODFs specifically have themal and visual as two seperate classes, and nothing in the odfs of the weapons say that they should be neutralized by Phantom VIR.

It is important that themal missiles successfully lock onto VIR phantom as if it was not their.

I agree with the 'major' status of this but. Visual image refractment? Doesn't say much about heat there.
This was always something that really bugged me about battlezone2, it's incredibly irritating that there is no missile strategy when faced with VIR. I can imagine seeing FAF used when the enemy team gets VIR, or even, *gasp*, tag cannon!

It makes blinding sense, it would improve the games intricate loadout strategy somewhat, *AND* it would give modders more options to play with.

It's major alright. :)

Yes it would make a major improvement, but
it isn't a game-crippling bug and has been pretty
much ignored the last five years.

I'd like to see Fafs and stingers work against VIR.

I agree, it has been confusing me for a long time why this was never done. It would seem that VIR would cancel the shadower locks, since its the "SHADOWER" and locks onto images but not the heat rockets. And when you use REDFIELD, then the hornet, faf, and stingers would not lock on, while shadower would.

I am almost wondering if it was actually intended or if it was just an oversight.
But it would be great for hornet, faf, stingers to lock onto VIR. . . .

Redfield was also from BZI, it is fine (although i would reduce its ammo) and it nuetralises Radar locking weaponry (e.g. comet cruise) and does not allow someone to 'target' something. Infact Radar Dampening was fixed in 1.3, making jammers for once actually useful.

I would very much like the same thing to happen for Thermal missiles. Hell, we might make a new special weapon that counter acts thermal missiles but not visual.

Actually, i really want to see the abilty to make that at least.

I thought MAJOR BUG would be saved for any real game breaking bugs like big framerate hits whenever you do something that shouldnt cause those hits, but yeah, it'd be nice to have fixed. I'd call it a medium bug, but whatever.

I'd call it a "polishing tweak".

This would very properly be termed a Kencodeâ,,¢ thing, and while it would probably be trivial for him to do we'd have to look for unintended effects, such as GT/GS's not firing, etc..  Extreme caution has to be used when changing weapons so as not to make for an invulnerable ship/weapon combo...

The radar damping is a good example, as units near a Scion Jammer were at first completely shielded from you telling the AI to attack them.  Messy...

-Av-

On the subject of jammers,
last strat vs scions I was in, the jammers DID
prevent me from targetting anything near them
for my AI. As I didn't have any effective thugs and
had to defend my base alone, I just couldn't attack
anything, not with tanks, assault units, APCs or bomber.

We had to call it a draw ...

Avatar you imply that -now- I can target stuff for AI when
they are near a jammer ... erm how??

This WAS reported during the closed beta and I was pretty sure it was addressed...   I can't check the changelog, or fire up the game as I'm at work.  If the Jammer is still FUBAR'd (German Word :) ) it's definately a MAJOR bug.

Hmmm, seems like Ken split some of the jamer functions out into seperate ODF entries, or at least seperate processes.  It may need only an ODF tweak to fix.  I'll be looking when I get home....

-Av-

QuoteIf the Jammer is still FUBAR'd (German Word  ) it's definately a MAJOR bug.

A bug? No, this is a balance issue, a new feature, not a bug. The Jammer was INTENDED to stop ISDF players using AI units. It was meant as the scion form of bomber defense, as well as a useful tool for the scions.

Try using archers, or anything else, for that matter, as a scion defense against bombers. You'll quickly realise why the Jammer works how it does. I, personally, find it much easier to destroy a 1000-health, large target with no weapons than I do destroying a 3000-health, heavily armed, much smaller rocket tank sitting on a service bay... Both are bomber defense.

Plus, with the ridiculously low amount of health a jammer has, I'm amazed anyone could moan about it in it's present state. It's gone from being completely useless to being marginally useful, but still bad, and here you are saying it needs to be weakened again! God, leave it alone, don't you think the poor jammer has been through enough?

As a final point, try to figure out HOW your tank's HUD would successfully tell another units, AI or human, to attack a unit that, as far as the tank is concerned, does not exist. When thinking about it that way, the only solution I can think of is to manually tell the wingman where the jammer is on the battlefield, and ask him to go there. Placing a nav beacon near the jammer and sending your AI units there is a pretty good way to do this. Even this is too much, IMO. From the single player missions it's quite clear that not only does the jammer prevent radar, targetting etc, it also prevents the communications. Remember that early mission where shabayev's voice communication is jammed by the jammer?

Bottom-line - the way the jammer now works is a new feature, not a bug. It also makes a lot of sense from the experiences of the single player campaign, and it helps give scions a way of counteracting the bomber, which is incredibly useful for levelling the playing firld, particularly in 1v1, where the bomber was far too good.

Just another note: I propose that the jammer be made *more* powerful - I propose that AI scouts NOT highlight enemy units within 200m of the jammer. That way, even with an AI scout following you the jammer would still be an anti-bomber defense. Similarly, I'd like the jammer to remove the 'paint' effect when a teammate tells you to 'attack their target'. This way the jammer would be the effective bomber-defense that it was supposed to be. It's cost should probably be increased to about 65 in light of these changes.

Is it me or does the jammer also jam your own team's functions?  I always found it annoying in 1.2 how your own jammers kept your scavs from picking up loose scrap near your jammer(s) fields.  Haven't tested them yet in 1.3, since I totally forgot about them.  :D

I like how the jammer works, but in a 1v1 game Scions are pretty much invincible. If the Jammer is dug in a base, or around a good amount of Gun Spires, there is no way you are going to be taking it out all by your lonesome self.

QuoteI like how the jammer works, but in a 1v1 game Scions are pretty much invincible. If the Jammer is dug in a base, or around a good amount of Gun Spires, there is no way you are going to be taking it out all by your lonesome self.

I strongly disagree. Jammers have 1000 health. That means it requires 3 hits from a mortar to destroy. If you're a half-decent shot with a mortar, that's a *very* easy task to accomplish.

Furthermore, utilising weapon-switching well, it's quite possible to kill the jammer with the standard blast/chain/mortar tank in *under* 2 seconds. Count two seconds out in your head now... That's a dead jammer.


Now consider the effect that the bomber has on those 'unbeatable' scions in a 1v1 games.


As for this whole 'scions unbeatable' issue, I still stand strong and say, if you use a service truck, beating blink is hard, but not impossible. Hell, once I won a 1v1 against a pretty well-known player using scions by using a tug pulling a service pod. The advantage of blink is all about the fact that you have to go back to base whenever they blink off, hence the reason trucks, especially in serviced-assaults with Atanks, are so important.

First off and before anyone brings it up, I know better than to argue balance here, only intent...  I'm not saying the following is fun, or would enhance/detract from the game, or have in any way any opinion about what it does to the balance between Scions and ISDF.  I absolutely bow to DF in matters of Scion units.

darn lawyers...

Anyway...

The Jammer was intended as a radar blind spot, not a visual blind spot.  It screws up your radar, like RED, not your vision ala VIR.   Thus, it should stop you from all but VISUALLY telling your units to target an enemy.  If you are staring straight at something you should be able to use the reticule to tell your troops to attack it.

I suppose the Jammer could be considered to be much more than that, jamming everything including comm between units, but that would be taking it beyond it's original intent.  This might be acceptable for humans only strat with little or no reliance on AI attackers, but it makes IA, SP, & MPI virtually unplayable depending on the number of humans involved and the evil b*st*rd that created the map coughNATTYcough....

I'd have to look at the changelog to see what/when/why it was changed but I do remember complaints that it rendered anything in range virtually unattackable by AI, and Ken talking about tweaking it.  I don't know that he ever did, though.

-Av-

QuoteI suppose the Jammer could be considered to be much more than that, jamming everything including comm between units, but that would be taking it beyond it's original intent

As I said, I believe it's original intent *was* to stop voice commans. The single player campaign confirms this.

As for the problem that was spoken about, with Ken fixing this. I believe it was the fact that AI units failed to attack 'jammed' units even when they were within visual and weapon range. I believe this is what was fixed.

Finally, AI-hungry players (IA/MPI/whatever) can always use AI scouts to paint the jammer for them, whereupon it can be ordered destroyed, or even bombed, while it is being painted.

Yeah, I don't have THAT much of a problem with it as is. I just find it a bit annoying, but hey, the changes are worth it IMO. :)

It all works out in the end, and DF's idea does work. (TV's 51er race is rigged up in BZRAP to be able to handle an anti jammer weapon which can be real helpful...they are quite interesting guys :))

Well, I still feel that visual targeting should work but if DF says it's handleable that's good enough for me.  :)

However....

Quote from: DarkFoxAs I said, I believe it's original intent *was* to stop voice commands. The single player campaign confirms this..

Well, SP is a little strange at times, but I have to disagree that it shows this.  I just ran through that mission (2nd ISDF) in 1.0 and it originally jammed my radar only.  Shabby gave me the order to attack AFTER the first one was up and running for a few seconds and was jabbering away constantly when we destroyed the second one. (The woman DOES love to say "follow me", doesn't she?)  

I believe the communications jamming she was talking about was the same thing Manson was talking about in the previous mission, that between the Carrier and the ground forces, not between wingmen.

The INF file does support more capabilities, though...

UNKNOWN STRUCTURE

Interfering with radar
and targeting systems.

I believe this could be taken as more than just stopping radar and weapons targeting, as shutting down the targeting reticule completely.

I fired up a 1.3 map and was also unable to see any difference when an AI scout was right next to the Jammer.  It didn't paint anything for me, either visually or in the Attack command list.  AI forces brought into range attacked everything including the Jammer, although they saved it for last.  This was in the Editor, though and may not reflect what happens ingame.

I also must've come into range of the darn thing at the wrong time as my radar "ping" noise was on overdrive.  I hate that, it happens in BZ1's editor all too often...  :)

Natty is all too fond of those darn things, tucking them into holes in cliffs and in the center of bases.  Given how intent his AI is on keeping Base structures up....  brrrrrrr

-Av-

Here are the speach files of shabayev's voice getting jammed:
http://www.centralimmune.fsnet.co.uk/1.wav
http://www.centralimmune.fsnet.co.uk/2.wav
http://www.centralimmune.fsnet.co.uk/3.wav

wave 1: (upon finding the jammer, slightly broken voice)
'destroy that object, it's interfering with our communications"
wave 2 (while close to the jammer):
Completely incomprehensible jamming sound
wave 3: (after the jammer is destroyed)
"That's what was jamming our transmissions'

I can see what you're saying about it jamming broad-scale communications, but it's the stuttered voive with interference that suggests that the jammer effects battlefield units. You might be right though, it might be only hampering the wingmen's coms, not completely stopping them.

As for using scouts to 'paint', simply allow the scout to follow you. Upon coming into radar range of the jammer (about 500m), the scout will paint any enemy units, including turrets and guntowers, which you can then proceed to order attacked simply by using the reticule.
Were you trying to order a bomber/AI unit to attack a jammer that didn't have any guntowers, turrets, or enemy units nearby? If so, that would be impossible, since an AI scout does not paint it for you, but it does beg the question of why you don't just go and shoot it.

Can you guys list down concisely what else you'd like the jammer to do?  I agree that it's original intention was to jam comm signals, but that's not gonna work in a literal manner in MP as we know.  Hmm, just imagine it, the jammer interrupting Voice IP (Ventrilo, BC, TS), as well as chat lines, lol. That'd be nice. Couldn't we just extend it's jamming range too?

Might be interesting to have the Jammer work with different effectiveness as to how close you are to it. Inititally the range could be made larger to compensate. Near the begining of the radius your radar cuts out and direct vehicle targeting won't work. As you go further into the radius eventually it would work like it does now, and you need target painting to be done by a scout or whatever in order to proceed, and when its quite close to the jammer you can't do much at all. Initially, this would let you be able to protect key areas with the Jammer, and also let you make it hard for your enemy to make base assaults and the like as they close in on a Jammer.

Oooooh...

While totally impossible that idea about it disrupting TS or other voice comms is totally EVIL...  I love it...  LOL...   :twisted:

DF, I didn't notice those voice disruptions ingame, thanks for pointing them out.  She WAS still able to order me around, though...   :D  (oh, Shabby!)

Yes, the Scout test I did was after my boys wiped out the surrounding units.  My main point of contention with the Jammer is that there's no way to direct the AI to destroy it, something very important to my usual GAIPS tactics.  (I'm the bait, my boys do the dirty work)

Still, I see your point as we did wipe the floor with the AI units even with a Jammer around.  It's definately not a game-stopper, just an annoyance.  A good old-fashioned herd of Sabres still gets the job done AND it does look cool.  I hate the fact that I can't build a GS on top of a Jammer now, btw..  That looked VERY cool.

-Av-

hmmm. How about a jammer does its stuff vs Radar, stops AI scouts from targeting stuff....but if you can paint and tell AI's to attack...this will mean bombers can attack...

so, either have a bomber saying '' i am sorry, i cannot attack Radar-shielded units) ''

but all other units can still attack, or

the bomber does attack, but its bomb randomly hits an area within 400m of the attacked target. The more jamming units, the more random the bomber hit is perhaps?

Or how about just leaving it as it is, since it's fine, and talking about this thermal missile issue, which is not fine? :)

I personally like how the jammer works....

For me, This is what i do (or did, using In the Shadows mod(nice mod BTW))

I would wipe the jammer out, order a bombing raid, and get out of there, by that time, the jammer was back up, and my bomber was attacking the enemy.
Through you can do this with other AI units

But whats wrong with telling them to follow?

And the thermal thing wont stop the game.

Umm, FUBAR means 'F'd Up Beyond All Recongition', amusing term if I say so myself. I dont think the krauts came up with that one, sounds like something an army guy would say.

yeah, we know, thats why it is labeled (medium bug).

Anyhow, is their any word from GSH or Ken or whoever it concerns on how/if/when this bug can be fixed?

FUBAR also meand Farked Up Beyond All Repair

A local radio station (WOUR) used to have FUBAR parties about 20 years ago.