Project Reality Forums

chrisweb89 wrote:@ Rhino, would the missle still act like this if it was only supposed to lock before launch? I have found that if the missle loses its initial lock, sometimes it won't relock onto the lase when it comes back into sight. I don't know anything about BF2 though so it may just have been that the missle didn't have enough time to relock.

Its kinda hard to explain but the locking on the HUD, before launch has very little to do with how the missile reacts after launch, other than what type of projectile is fired and what direction its facing when its fired.

snooggums wrote:Would this eliminate counterlazing or would someone on the other team lazing at the same time take precedence?

I'd love to get rid of counterlazing of course.

I dunno quite what you mean but if your talking friendly missiles being able to lock onto enemy lazes, in BF2 there is no way to stop.

If we had a friendly player sitting in the same object that the laze was attached too we could then put a friendly lock box over the target but that's not possible

dtacs wrote:
You mean out of view as in out of view distance, correct? Notice in the video, I tested the tank when it was out of the view distance, resulting in fuzzy white track bug. I also tested the peripheral vision trick. You're implying that this should not be possible yeah? Disagree, PR has unrealistic view distances and this makes up for it.

Also explain how this would make it impossible? Tank is out of view distance, I see the little white fuzz of its tracks, and hold it down while calling in CAS. Whats not possible here?

Dtacs they arent talking about out of view distance, they mean literally out of view. as in you are no longer looking at the target. IRL a spotter is required to keep the lase on target till the missile strikes. the current system allows the spotter to spot, then go do something else. which is both unrealistic and unreliable as if the target moves the lase becomes useless, currently it is also impossible to lase a moving target. with the proposed system it would become possible, problem is though it wouldnt be as easy as you think. remember a player still has to stop and lift his mouse every little bit meaning the lase will maybe only be on target 70% of the time depending how well the person tracks the target to begin with.

forcing the spotter to stay in the exposed also allows the targets who are cautious and are on the look out, to spot the threat and eliminate it. there are advantages in this suggestion to both ends of the laser.

dtacs wrote:This would make it absolutely impossible for armor to survive if they could be hit when moving. Imagine it in the open, a jet would have no trouble taking it down.

I do agree at the holding down part for stationary vehicles though.

Your going to be lasing it anyway. With the proper skills, it's incredibly easy.

[R-DEV]dbzao wrote:There are work being done to improve the laser system.

If it was that easy, it would have been done before, but there are issues between stuff working on local and dedicated servers.

Nevertheless, we might see some good stuff coming that way.

Thread over imo.

With this though, can we bring back the 2 magnifications on the GTLD's

Bringerof_D wrote:Dtacs they arent talking about out of view distance, they mean literally out of view. as in you are no longer looking at the target. IRL a spotter is required to keep the lase on target till the missile strikes.

Please don't quote me until you read the whole thread, and my posts after that clearly stating that I misinterpreted what he was saying.

the current system allows the spotter to spot, then go do something else. which is both unrealistic and unreliable as if the target moves the lase becomes useless, currently it is also impossible to lase a moving target. with the proposed system it would become possible, problem is though it wouldnt be as easy as you think.

Careful patronizing people who posted before you, its a dangerous path.

forcing the spotter to stay in the exposed also allows the targets who are cautious and are on the look out, to spot the threat and eliminate it. there are advantages in this suggestion to both ends of the laser.

Please explain how it is advantageous for the one who is lasing to be exposed more. I unfortunately do not see why having a higher risk of dying is an advantage?

its more realistic and easier to have to hold down the lase and have it quickly repost itself on the spot you are holding. also having the laser not follow the lase projectile would make it so that enemy spotters can't see a box floating from you to the mark. hopefully rhino is right and this gets implemented. i think it should be pretty high up there on things to fix. including the lb's co-pilot laser! *fingers crossed*

One last question, any idea if the lase will show up for the spotter? I geuss it really would matter but in some cases it would be nice to know that the lase was hitting the target and not the projectile flying by sending no lase, an example of this would be lasing a gaskin with only its turret stcking over the hill.

wow, just went on the interwebs and saw my thread having 5 pages .... didnt expact that,
im glad to see ive initiated such a discussion and that its already been thought of by the devs.

@rhino:
you said you have to change the system and talked something about travelspeed and sticky explosion particles things.
i dont know anything about coding (so pls tell me if im wrong), but cant it just be done the way its with the laser guided firemode? i dont know if there are differences between vehicle laser and the GLTD, but if you launch a missile in LG mode, theres a lasertarget right where your crosshairpoints and its continiuosly updated, so ...
or is there any problem with this?

If you don't understand don't worry unless you want to learn how to code for BF2.

chrisweb89 wrote:I think combined arms may have been working on something simliar to this, I think it consisted of laser targets which were deployed in the smoke far enogh away from the tank or APC, to either make the bomb/missle hi the lase and only leave the vehicle slightly hurt, or confuse the missle with so many lases that it would fly off to some random spot and hopefully not kill the tank.

This new way of lasing looks very promising and I hope it will work, as for the testing and effectivness, do we know yet if the guided weapons will respond properly to the lase source changeing every half second? I ask this because even with 2 lases on a single target the munition can get very confused and not hit anything or miss by enough not to kill the target

Actually that's close, but also only one of the theories behind the system. Due to the FCS system in Combined Arms, every vehicle had a target signature to allow for a small deviation permittance whilst firing on the move (in a tank).

The only problem with this was that "vanilla" smoke would still allow the tank to lock on to the target even while hidden my a dense smokescreen, which was deemed to be unrealistic and hampering of many vehicle strategies and tactics.

What was developped, or at least explained in theory before a POC could be made, was for the smoke to have a carrier-defense style projectile. This would cause an invisible collision-mesh barrier that would break the lock, however had the extreme draw back of not allowing any projectile to pass through, which also was deemed to be a greater problem than the initial one which it was trying to fix.

@Rhino, do you know if it's possible to create a collision mesh that only interrupts heat/target signatures and not projectiles? That would help solve many problems, including the aforementionned one.



I seriously like the idea of a high RoF, high speed projectile GLTD system with Target signatures with a short time-to-live in the particle effect. If there's any POC being made, I'd really like to see it

McLuv wrote:What was developped, or at least explained in theory before a POC could be made, was for the smoke to have a carrier-defense style projectile. This would cause an invisible collision-mesh barrier that would break the lock, however had the extreme draw back of not allowing any projectile to pass through, which also was deemed to be a greater problem than the initial one which it was trying to fix.

Indeed, you would just fire some smoke and you would have a 120deg shield in front of you.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Indeed, you would just fire some smoke and you would have a 120deg shield in front of you.

wouldn't this be quite good for gameplay though and give tank protection against the lase?

killonsight95 wrote:wouldn't this be quite good for gameplay though and give tank protection against the lase?

What he meant was that if done in that manner, the smoke would function as if it was a huge brick wall, and stop ALL projectiles or objects. In other words, a very unrealistic method that would be exploited beyond all worst nightmares.

The proper solution is to create a smoke screen that can block laser paths such as laser designators and guidance systems, yet not interfere with thermal guidance, SACLOS, or direct-fire weapons.


And my dream, is to see smoke screens that are visually "active" with the naked eye or with night vision (if ever used in PR), yet have an "invisible" or see-through texture while using TIS. But chances are I'll probably win the lottery faster than I'd see something like that in PR.

'[R-DEV wrote:Ninja2dan;1364816']1.What he meant was that if done in that manner, the smoke would function as if it was a huge brick wall, and stop ALL projectiles or objects. In other words, a very unrealistic method that would be exploited beyond all worst nightmares.

2.The proper solution is to create a smoke screen that can block laser paths such as laser designators and guidance systems, yet not interfere with thermal guidance, SACLOS, or direct-fire weapons.

1.oh right i see a problem there
2. is this possible or is it ethier very hard to code or hardcoded?

rhino, you didnt answer my question if its possible to make it just like the LG firemode.

2. Not any way I can think of no

And zoddom I dont understand your question, but most likley the answer is no

Or do you mean Wire Guided? It is possible to make the laser "wire guided" but as I said in my posts before, if the laser is going at a much faster speed it is most likley not necessary but it should be possible, at least for a single round at a time yes.

Why not just make something that would be more like a toggle trigger, click once to fire off a lase, that could be moved around even though it's already collided with the world? Then to stop lazing you just click again.

This means that the PGMs would go where you want them to, and the laze would actually work a bit more like it should in reality.

Ninja2Dan: YouTube - PR: Thermal Imaging, Turret Stabilization and FCS I believe you were looking for this.

Please if you have no advanced knowledge of BF2 coding do not make suggestions on how stuff "could" be coded...

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Please if you have no advanced knowledge of BF2 coding do not make suggestions on how stuff "could" be coded...

Well, I just made a guess.

It was pretty much just thought up of based on how the rangefinder works in PR, or at least how it appears to work.

If it were up to me though, lasing would only be for assisting in finding targets, and in theory you shouldn't require a lase to have the munition guided to where you want it to be.

So then i'm guessing there's a problem with just changing the laser to a click to use it and have a smooth stream rather than our crappy box am I right?