[QoL Suggestion] Keep reconneutered blips reconneutered

[DocDesastro]

Easy one. Once you know what a blip is - and even if you are going out of sight but still in sensor range - the blip should be marked as what it is and not as 'unknown mech/vehicle'. If leaving sensor range this is fine, but not, if your computer has a lock on the target and knows what it is.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

I would agree. Computers that have the capacity to run all the systems on a mech should be capable of data storage for targets.

I would say, at least retain info on targets that remain as blips.

Now if, for example, a blip completely leaves sensor range for a time, then you don't know if it's the same target or a new bogey incoming, then even the computer can't extrapolate after total loss of sensor contact. That's where I'd say battlefield instinct or dropship Intel has to fill in.

 

[scJazz]

Yeah this has mildly irritated me from Day 1 but I understand that in programming terms it is just easier to tag it as Unknown. Not a big deal but would be nice to have.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

In those missions where the opfor sends two lances after you and there's high ground that's difficult to access, I often take a stand at that location and sensor tag from cover with LRM bombardment.

At least until a lot of their armor is soft, there's not much direct line-of-sight. And with many swarming around trying to get at you while never leaving sensor contact, yes, our battle computers should be keeping them tagged with the information the last sensor lock had. That kind of situation requires a lot of awareness and mental inventory, so I don't end up wasting salvos on lesser priority targets.

 

[bobucles]

I understand that in programming terms it is just easier to tag it as Unknown.

"was identified" is just a flag, bro. Set it once and forget it.