FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login

    Should units be able to track a target outside of intel range?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
    10 Posts 8 Posters 574 Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Anachronism_A
      Anachronism_
      last edited by

      An example of this is when an int locks in an attack order on a bomber that later goes out of intel (vision/radar/omni) range, and the int seems able to track/chase it anyway.

      Logically, when there is no up-to-date information on the whereabouts of a unit, real-time tracking like this is unrealistic.

      A voided order, or an order to the last known location, or an order to the anticipated location based on the last known information would make more sense.

      Should the ability to track a unit that is not within range of any relevant form of intel (ie: vision/radar/sonar/omni) be considered a bug to fix, or a desired feature, or something else?

      pfp credit to gieb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • JipJ
        Jip
        last edited by Jip

        For this particular issue it is important how you intend to fix it 🙂 .

        A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
        • CheeseBerryC
          CheeseBerry
          last edited by

          Not sure if 'realistic' is a good argument as you could explain that phenomenon with all types of weird scifi tech. Like, quantum entanglement or something.

          And its not like the rest of the game, when taken literally, makes a lot of sense either..

          I would argue though that it's certainly unintuitive from a player perspective, so its probably worth taking a look at.

          That being said, is it even (reasonably) possible to change that target locking behavior without screwing up everything else?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • T
            Tagada Balance Team
            last edited by

            I consider this a core mechanic and I would be very much opposed to changing it. The implications of such change would be massive.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 7
            • veteranasheV
              veteranashe
              last edited by

              You would bring qol down I think too

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • SpikeyNoobS
                SpikeyNoob Global Moderator
                last edited by

                Think about how annoying it is to kill an early cybran stealth strat. If locking is removed then all it has to do is move out of vision. It would never die if microed corrected (with good asf support)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                • T
                  Tagada Balance Team
                  last edited by

                  Just imagine trying to deal with T1 bombers around the map on a 20x20 if your inties would constantly lose orders. Good luck with that.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
                  • MoraxM
                    Morax
                    last edited by

                    No, please learn how to protect your first transport better and this is not a problem.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • S
                      snoog
                      last edited by

                      I think removing this would be a massive buff to strats in particular.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • CheeseBerryC
                        CheeseBerry
                        last edited by CheeseBerry

                        Most of you seemingly go directly to the "remove the target lock once a unit left intel range" option, but as Jip already alluded to, there are other possible changes too.

                        For example, you could make it such that a locked unit always shows it's accompanied radar signature. That'd remove the unintuitive part, where only some units magically know where their target is, while keeping the balance of being able to kill bombers/drops reliably, intact.

                        Tbf, this change would bring other (balance) problems with it, so implementing it exactly like I just suggested it is not a good idea.

                        The discussion of "intel consistency" in the game is an interesting one though, with at least some possibility for making the game better

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                        • First post
                          Last post