EnglishGermanFrenchRussianPolishItalianSpanish
Log inRegister
 
Should missiles be long range weapons ?????
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Ezarkal





Joined: 22 Apr 2015

Location: On the bridge

PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 17:45    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Thufar wrote:
I really don't understand this argument about missiles.

I was talking to a deer hunter one day who was bragging about the deer he shot at 300 yards. I did admit it was a "good" shot; however, there was exactly zero hunting prowess exhibited. I asked him to come back and tell me of the story of how he shot a deer at 30 feet, and then I would be impressed. With that in mind...

Quote:
MIssiles should be LONG range.

They should also be FAR faster and FAR more maneuverable then what they are intended to kill.

A medium fighter missile should be able to easily chase down and hit a medium fighter for example.

They should also do enough damage to take down the shields in one hit.
Then two more hits to waste the hull.


Press backspace to come to all stop. Left click over target box, press "R" three times - poof! Rinse, repeat. Absolutely zero chance of being in any danger whatsoever. Wow, that sounds like fun; let's all do it together now, <backspace-click-r-r-r, click-r-r-r, click-r-r-r...> Wohoo! That was what, fun?

Really? You guys want to take your overpowered Skunk with overpowered missiles that cannot miss into a fight you have absolutely no chance of loosing and then have the nerve to complain that Egosoft can't program smart enough AI? Am I the only one on the forum who can see the hypocracy in that? Are you all really that small-minded?

No, when you ladies take your skunk armed with a single mk1 weapon (not inertial hammer), with mk1 shields and engines, into a fight with a riot squad that is far enough away from a station you can't RSLG to, pry your hand off your joystick or mouse and come start a new thread and write about how you survived. I promise, we'll talk, I'll be impressed.

Until then,
TTFN
Thu



...or, exactly the other way around. Get jumped by three tiny pirate fighters that will
-one-shot you from crazy range without you having any chances of doing anything to dodge or escape...
-or escape it by pressing a single button called "drop anti-missile measures" if any missile counter are ever implemented in the game. That would be fairly easy and boring, I think.


So in both offence and defense, it sounds like you'll just invert the present problem: Instead of having useless missiles, you'll get useless standard weapons. You'll never get the chance to use them because missiles will be way too powerful to make the use of anything else worth the try.

I agree with the fact that missiles need some boost, but I wouldn't go to that extent. It shouldn't ruin the dogfighting.

As I see it right now, the problem is there are no missiles that are truly suited to dogfighting. So the main issue would be tracking, but it must not become sure hit either.

I like the idea previously mentioned about proximity detonation. Warhead gets within 50m of the target, then distance to target increase (due to missing the direct hit), then your warhead detonates and the target gets AoE damage (moderate as compared to a direct hit, but still decent).
Or, within 150 m of the target, the warhead splits in smaller warheads that tracks the target like a swarm(similar to the astrobee, or even to the homeworld 2 torpedo frigates ammo)


_________________
Murphy's law states: -If anything can go wrong, it will.
Addendum: -Murphy was an optimist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GCU Grey Area



MEDALMEDAL

Joined: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 4192 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 18:28    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

RAVEN.myst wrote:
Not *necessarily* true - it's a matter of picking the right missile for the job - I typically (speaking X3TC/AP here, not XR) use missiles that will 1-shot-kill whenever possible - otherwise, I feel much as you do, that it's rather wasteful, and then I'd rather shield-strip first with guns, at which point I may as well finish the job with guns, too. Very Happy

You certainly like using unnecessarily expensive missiles. Right missile for the job for me is the cheapest I can get away with. I use a lot of them (click the profile button at the bottom of this post if you're curious to see uplink stats including how many missiles I used in a typical TC game), so any savings on each missile certainly add up.

Broadly speaking, take those one-shotters you mentioned & shift their intended targets up a class if there are no shields in the way - e.g. Tempest is an M3 killer for me, for that matter even a crappy little Silkworm can finish off a lot of the M3s & they're cheap as chips.

As for RGWs, sell them? Horrified at the mere thought. Got to hoard those - they're precious. There are a number of ships with otherwise incredibly weak firepower which can use them to punch well above their weight. For example, if you're playing Lost Lar & want to run combat missions in your Angel TP (decidedly risky but bloody fun) they tend to go much better with some RGWs in the hold - recommend saving them for M6 targets.


Quote:
OK, so back to Rebirth (especially since this is its forum - d'oh!) - erm... no one-shotters to be found anywhere, sorry! Oops Of course, the ship classes have been redefined, so even a Xenon N is a far cry from what it used to be! Still, as you and pretty much everyone else concurs... the new missiles are snowballs (which haven't been properly packed, either) Razz

Starflash is certainly a snowball, possibly a melted one at that. As for the rest of the single warhead anti-fighter stuff, their warheads are ok-ish (bit light-weight on V.Hard, but I could manage), reckon they just need more speed. Personally don't need longer range - they generally only have to go about 500m-1km, they just don't do it anywhere near fast enough to be reliable.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
UniTrader
Moderator (Script&Mod)
Moderator (Script&Mod)

MEDAL

Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 13125 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 18:43    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

hmm, would anyone mind testing diffrent re-balancing settings for Missiles AND Missile Defenses in a Mod to see how they turn out in practice instead of just speculating about it? i would offer to start such a Project (willl be entirely based on User Feedback though so no feedback => no changes/improvements, but given enough feedback i could update at least weekly...

Asking because i made a Script which adds basic Missile Defense to the DO and his Drones, and both Missiles and the Defesne against them should be balanced against each other. also just increasing the Range of Missiles (which was the initial request) is certainly counter-prouctive if the Target runs this Script because i have a 99% intercept success if the Missile was fired further away than 5km (although i admit i have to cheat a bit - the drones are not maneuverable enough, which is silly because they should one of the best overall meneuverabilities)


_________________
if not stated otherwise everything i post is licensed under WTFPL

Ich mache keine S&M-Auftragsarbeiten, aber wenn es fragen gibt wie man etwas umsetzen kann helfe ich gerne weiter Wink

I wont do Script&Mod Request work, but if there are questions how to do something i will GLaDly help Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 1599 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
modified
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 21:35    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

GCU Grey Area wrote:
RAVEN.myst wrote:
Not *necessarily* true - it's a matter of picking the right missile for the job - I typically (speaking X3TC/AP here, not XR) use missiles that will 1-shot-kill whenever possible - otherwise, I feel much as you do, that it's rather wasteful, and then I'd rather shield-strip first with guns, at which point I may as well finish the job with guns, too. Very Happy

You certainly like using unnecessarily expensive missiles. Right missile for the job for me is the cheapest I can get away with. I use a lot of them (click the profile button at the bottom of this post if you're curious to see uplink stats including how many missiles I used in a typical TC game), so any savings on each missile certainly add up.

I was expecting that retort Very Happy But I play an economic game, always - which means that I have surpluses of credits that I can throw at any problem. My style is more about strategy than about tactics - plan ahead, prepare, over-prepare if possible, and overcome. This isn't to say that in the early game there aren't very entertaining and intense furballs (and I like to revisit that in the later game, when I get bored), but since I know that my economy is always going to come right and be able to subsidise me, it's not a problem. Also, considering the old adage that "time is money", killing enemies quickly means that I move on to the next task so much faster - in this way, the expensive missile pays for itself. Also, the "expensive" missile that 1-hit-kills its target is saving me time and potential repairs or other expenses. Furthermore, 3 or 4 "cheaper" missiles vs one "expensive" one? Sounds like a wash to me in any case.


GCU Grey Area wrote:
As for RGWs, sell them? Horrified at the mere thought.

Erm, please re-read what I posted! I said "I USED TO only ever sell them" - past tense, but for a long time now I've been using them for more *cough* "constructive" (what's a prefix between friends, right?) *cough* purposes Very Happy


GCU Grey Area wrote:
Starflash is certainly a snowball, possibly a melted one at that. As for the rest of the single warhead anti-fighter stuff, their warheads are ok-ish (bit light-weight on V.Hard, but I could manage), reckon they just need more speed. Personally don't need longer range - they generally only have to go about 500m-1km, they just don't do it anywhere near fast enough to be reliable.

Yes, the speed and agility are definitely the salient issues - but I believe that the flight duration should not be shortened, so with improved speed would come greater range. This is not just (nor, in fact, mainly) for long-range bombardment, but rather to give the missile a longer pursuit time, to give it a better chance to chase down its target - a single dodge with a tight turning arc should not automatically defeat the missile - this is a matter of fun rather than "realism": I'd rather dodge the missile once but then not be out of the woods yet, needing to evade it perhaps two more times before I can breathe that sigh of relief - during which time, of course, more could be launched against me. Notice that I don't only want missiles to be more effective in order to hit NPC more consistently - I also want THEIR arsenal to be upgraded. Very Happy

However, I do disagree with "only 500m - 1km" - that's not a missile, that's a short-range rocket. A missile SHOULD (imo) have some legs - I consider a missile weapons as an OPENING strike, not a finishing move. As soon as you launch that tracking warhead at the enemy, if you did so in a competent manner, that enemy MUST change plan/approach or suffer the consequences. Thus, it is a way to influence the enemy, to disrupt his/her attack vector.

EDIT: Hmm, an observation on the "melted snowballness", heheh: here I think I'm detecting an out-of-sync stat creep - the ships are getting tougher, but the missiles aren't evolving to keep pace. This isn't the first time we've seen this, either - missiles that used to be powerful in X2 became quite lame in Reunion, and even more so in TC and AP, as ship stats kept getting buffed (with some exceptions, of course - yes, Elephant, I'm looking at you!) but the missiles stats remained pretty, erm, static.


_________________
-
Station administration would like to remind guests to keep children away from the airlocks.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff


Last edited by RAVEN.myst on Fri, 17. Feb 17, 21:39; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2466 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 21:39    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

To me having 99% accurate missile defence is as bad as having no missile defence.

IMO 99% accurate MD would be ok only if it would have limited capacity/fire rate so that it would be possible to overload MD with several missiles

As someone mentioned Freespace had good missile countermeasure system and AI was able to use it at to competend level (so no Godlike skill, nor retard level reflex).
Too bad something like this is waay beyond Egosoft scripting capabilities.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 1599 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 21:46    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

mr.WHO wrote:
To me having 99% accurate missile defence is as bad as having no missile defence.

+1.
No, make that +99.
Ummm, OK, how about we split the difference? Smile
In a nutshell, I agree - it must be a middle ground of sorts, to accommodate and reward strong implementations of either - work hard to defeat countermeasures and you get through; conversely, focus hard on a solid defense, and you seldom get hit.


_________________
-
Station administration would like to remind guests to keep children away from the airlocks.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
UniTrader
Moderator (Script&Mod)
Moderator (Script&Mod)

MEDAL

Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 13125 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 22:25    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

the 99% was for a Fire distance of 5km and above, which is rarely the case Rolling Eyes below that efficiency is somewhere in the region of 10% (without drone alignment cheat) to 80% (with drone alignment cheat), and the closer the Missile was fired the less likely it gets intecepted successfully (although i assign more drones to intercept when the Distance is closer)

Note: all Drones are launched long ago in advance, and stay standby in formation aroun the Ship till they get an Intercept Order. no need to undock them first, which would completely screw the Drone Missile Defense


_________________
if not stated otherwise everything i post is licensed under WTFPL

Ich mache keine S&M-Auftragsarbeiten, aber wenn es fragen gibt wie man etwas umsetzen kann helfe ich gerne weiter Wink

I wont do Script&Mod Request work, but if there are questions how to do something i will GLaDly help Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2466 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 23:18    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

UniTrader wrote:
the 99% was for a Fire distance of 5km and above, which is rarely the case Rolling Eyes below that efficiency is somewhere in the region of 10% (without drone alignment cheat) to 80% (with drone alignment cheat), and the closer the Missile was fired the less likely it gets intecepted successfully (although i assign more drones to intercept when the Distance is closer)


Hmm, this sounds promising - it was tested against player or AI vs. AI?

What about propagation? If DO is involved then I assume this is capship-only right?
What about fighters? I know they are plain useless, but without MD they would be even more useless.

Also is/will be MD ammo based?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 1599 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 23:20    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Sorry, it wasn't my intention to appear critical. Oops I'm guessing that if you get sufficient interest to make it worthwhile to work on it, those ratios would likely be among the things that would be tweaked. The basic "envelope" seems sound to me: the longer the point-defenses have to identify the threat and calculate a response, the more reliable that response will be - this simply makes sense.


_________________
-
Station administration would like to remind guests to keep children away from the airlocks.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sparky Sparkycorp
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 6337 on topic
Location: UK
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sat, 18. Feb 17, 00:59    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

mr.WHO wrote:
The problem is that the combat logic and mechanics haven't changed much since X2 - I'm very skeptical that they make it better in X4 Sad

I mean they need 2+ years to fix Sucellus properly use it's main weapon - it yet to be fixed in upcoming 4.10 patch.

If they couldn't fix someting THAT basic how can you expect they improve combat rarther than salvage that all broken AI logic that they already have since X2?

What is it about the changes to the Sucellus and Balor in 4.10 that you're not keen on? They seem to be working OK to me but it's a new thing in vanilla so I don't have huge experiance. Both try to keep at range and my Sucellus trio are regularly using their IHCs in combat now.


_________________
X:R mod list. X:R Wiki.
Updated TC/AP Bonus Pack. AP TS efficiency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2466 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sat, 18. Feb 17, 01:13    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

None - I'm satisfied by the fix of 4.10.
What I'm not satisfied is that I bitched about Sucellus since 2.0 and yet it took them so long to actually fix this Sad

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sparky Sparkycorp
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 6337 on topic
Location: UK
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sat, 18. Feb 17, 01:19    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Ah, cool. Sorry, I mistook "yet to be fixed in" to mean "still not fixed in".


_________________
X:R mod list. X:R Wiki.
Updated TC/AP Bonus Pack. AP TS efficiency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2466 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sat, 18. Feb 17, 02:08    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Well, I put "yet" for more dramatic sound, but it more or less true as 4.10 is still not released (finally went to RC1 today) Rolling Eyes

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sparky Sparkycorp
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 6337 on topic
Location: UK
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sat, 18. Feb 17, 02:39    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

hehe


_________________
X:R mod list. X:R Wiki.
Updated TC/AP Bonus Pack. AP TS efficiency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikola515





Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 2650 on topic
Location: DeVries
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Sun, 19. Feb 17, 04:28    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

What if they improve missiles but limit capacity of them that can be carried on ship at the time. For example missiles are powerful weapons but you can use them so many times before you need to resupply ? Also in a next title different ships have different missile capacity that can be loaded on it. For example we can load only 10 missiles instead of 100 (in total). But also this would need easy way to rearm ships. I personally don't want look for traders every time I dock to rearm Rolling Eyes


Edit: I would also like to add that missiles are just like drones important part of game. But do to poor balance, price and AI they are useless. They are useful against capitals but that is because they are hard to miss....


_________________
It's not world hunger because we can't feed poor,it's because there will never be enough to feed the rich .....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
Control Panel
Login Data
The time now is Sat, 25. Feb 17, 04:10

All times are GMT + 2 Hours


Board Security

Copyright © EGOSOFT 1989-2017
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Template created by Avatar & BurnIt!
Debug: page generation = 0.70524 seconds, sql queries = 29