X4 - important question about missiles

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19

X4 - important question about missiles

Post by mr.WHO » Thu, 14. Dec 17, 19:35

Hi, I'm not sure if I already asked this question, but I'd like to know whta are the planned improvements to missile logic comparing to previos games?

I mean ALL previous games had following problems:
- destructible missiles you launched dedonate in your face killing/damaging you.
- NPC susicide themselves with their own missiles


Therefore I wonder how do you plan to adress these issues in X4?

I think absolute minimum is to impement "missile safety" - misile can be destroyed, but do not detonate untill they are close to target. I mean in the real life warheads of both fighters and submarines are not armed immediately after launch, but after they are in safe distance from the unit wo launched it.

However destructible missiles will still make an issue that they will be destroyed when launcher is under fire, or fire it's guns in time of launch. Player can avoid this, but AI is too stupid for that.
In ancient "missile safety" script for X3 there was a trick that missiles are invulnerable for several seconds after launch which worked OK.

Also last question - will you implement alternative anti-missile measurements - e.g. flares for fighters.
Currently AI fighters have no way to defend themselves agains missile which is very boring.

All above issues makes missile gameplay very very bad for the past games :(

User avatar
JSDD
Posts: 834
Joined: Fri, 21. Mar 14, 21:51

Re: X4 - important question about missiles

Post by JSDD » Sat, 16. Dec 17, 16:13

mr.WHO wrote:Hi, I'm not sure if I already asked this question, but I'd like to know whta are the planned improvements to missile logic comparing to previos games?

I mean ALL previous games had following problems:
- destructible missiles you launched dedonate in your face killing/damaging you.
- NPC susicide themselves with their own missiles


Therefore I wonder how do you plan to adress these issues in X4?
... interesting question !!

i'd suggest to mount missile launchers NOT before / in front of the lasers, maybe below or atop the ship. the launch direction should be kind of fixed pointing sideways maybe, so that the bullets path fired straight ahead dont intersect with the path the missile is taking.

mr.WHO wrote:I think absolute minimum is to impement "missile safety" - misile can be destroyed, but do not detonate until they are close to target.
... or you activate the fuze yourself somehow, adding a "component" to the missile object allows you to set a minimum distance (dependent on ship size or other such parameters) at which the missile explodes. or another component, allowing you to activate the missile only if the distance to the target starts to increase + minimum distance is reached, so that the most damage (which of course should depend on the distance to the target, ship size, etc) is caused

mr.WHO wrote:However destructible missiles will still make an issue that they will be destroyed when launcher is under fire, or fire it's guns in time of launch.
if under fire, there could be a kind of "lock system" that prohibits anyone from launching a missile, depending on parameters that the players can change, such as:
--> dont fire missile if i 've been hit 2 for the last seconds [yes/no]
mr.WHO wrote:flares
or a kind of "explosive reactive armour", optionally mounted on the ship hull at any equipment dock ...
To err is human. To really foul things up you need a computer.
Irren ist menschlich. Aber wenn man richtig Fehler machen will, braucht man einen Computer.


Mission Director Beispiele

iforgotmysocks
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri, 8. Nov 13, 23:35

Post by iforgotmysocks » Sat, 16. Dec 17, 21:30

The most elegant and cheapest method would be to just launch missiles with an angle or from the top/bottom/sides of the ship, so they won't fly in the same streight line as the weapons shoot, and they won't get hit by an enemy flying towards the player.

User avatar
Killjaeden
Posts: 5023
Joined: Sun, 3. Sep 06, 18:19

Post by Killjaeden » Sat, 16. Dec 17, 22:47

I think instead of some weird missile invincibility or something, the doctrine for how the AI and players use missiles should be rethought.
AI would fire missiles when also firing lasers at the same target. This could be prevented. AI in X3 would also especially like firing missiles, when you where behind them, firing at them -> resulting in them blowing up.
Lastly, missile launch mechanisms could be modified. Launching at an angle away from the ship, and launching from a point that is not directly under the weapons. In X3 the missiles would always launch directly below the ship and start flying towards the target (upwards relative to the firer, if he shoots straight on towards the target).

Dumping some decoys (flares) is also not a believable way to defend anymore. IR seekers from modern missiles can already dinstinguish between the heat signature and characteristic of some decoy magnesium flare and a real jet/helicopter turbine. What's more sensible are active defenses like shooting the missiles directly with kinetic/laser/missile weapons or EMP weapons for disabling it.
Image
XTC Mod Team Veteran. My current work:
Image

w.evans
Posts: 2954
Joined: Tue, 18. Nov 14, 17:23

Post by w.evans » Thu, 21. Dec 17, 01:38

Killjaeden wrote:AI would fire missiles when also firing lasers at the same target. This could be prevented.
Think this was actually fixed this way in XR. Some ships are faster than the missiles they fire though and, uh, well...

About firing missiles at an angle, how would you aim dumbfires?

Snafu_X3
Posts: 3934
Joined: Wed, 28. Jan 09, 16:14

Post by Snafu_X3 » Thu, 21. Dec 17, 03:13

Minimum arming (fusing) distance has been a feature on most guided missiles since humans stopped using basic rockets, certainly post-WW2. It was even a factor in some WW2 iron bombs to prevent them from damaging a low-flying bomber intent on its target

If a craft happens (by extreme bad luck) to be hit by shrapnel from a destroyed munition then.. shit happens. However, its /warhead/ shouldn't explode within AoE of it's launcher in 5x9 chances or less, given the amount of effort needed to set modern explosives off by happenstance..

@w.evans Aiming dumbfires (rockets) is easy: mount them on a gimbal similar to current rocket mounts on Apache etc
Wiki X:R 1st Tit capping
Wiki X3:TC vanilla: Guide to generic missions, Guide to finding & capping Aran
Never played AP; all X3 advice is based on vanilla+bonus pack TC or before: AP has not changed much WRT general advice.

I know how to spell teladiuminumiumium, I just don't know when to stop!

Dom (Wiki Moderator) 8-) DxDiag

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19

Post by mr.WHO » Tue, 2. Jan 18, 17:59

One more question regarding missiles in X4 - will you implement "missile lock on"?

You can see missile lock on here:
https://youtu.be/Q8HmW6ti4LA?t=2m43s

I mean in all X-games so far you only select target, launch missile and the missile will automatically lock-on the target.


I think adding lock-on would add anouther nice balance to the missiles logic:
- various missiles would have various lon-on time
- some missiles would have no lock-on (e.g. just like current missiles) but some penalties - e.g. short range or lower tracking ability.
- adding lock-on would make it more difficult to use missiels in close range dogfights - the benefit? AI would less likely to blow itself up with it's own missiles during dogfights.

User avatar
Santi
Moderator (DevNet)
Moderator (DevNet)
Posts: 3353
Joined: Tue, 13. Feb 07, 22:06

Post by Santi » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 01:21

Dogfighting wise I like the way the single missiles work in X Rebirth as they target the engines of enemy fighters, really effective when you get fighters going across you and trying to get in your tail, they do not work when going head on as that will be a bit OP but in a big fighter melee they really wipe the floor.
A por ellos que son pocos y cobardes

Zetoss
Posts: 340
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 07, 01:17

Post by Zetoss » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 03:46

+1 to launch missiles at angle! Of course angled launchers can't fire anything that doesn't track, either pivot the tube for different types or have separate launchers that can only load specific missile types...

On that note I super love the swarm type missiles in XR, they circle like a ring of death after launch and it both looks and works yummy. Maybe even single fire missiles could have a version that does the "corkscrew" thing instead of flying in a straight line? They should move slower and have smaller payload but obviously be super hard to pewpew before they hit their target, where as the straight line ones can move faster and hit harder when you see a nice opening to whack something big with poor turning radius.

Noticed in the latest stream that fighters don't have turrets, this is probably for the best since in X3 I just set orders on my rear turrets to blast any incoming ouchies before firing on enemies and it made the drawn out fights against groups of well stocked enemies a bit too survivable. Of course I'll most likely be frustrated and defeated plenty in X4 without that but it's probably better than being invulnerable to small numbers of missiles... probably... totally not already missing those rear turrets, promise... *face not at all looking like someone just died*

DavidGW
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat, 18. May 13, 06:40

Post by DavidGW » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 04:12

Just because it's a dumb fire missile doesn't mean it has to fly straight.

They could be launched at an angle, and then curve forward to fly straight.

Big, powerful missiles should be launched off to the side, and then accelerate forward. They should have a proximity fuse to the target (so they don't overshoot, and explode instead) as well as a safety fuse so they don't explode in your face.

In fact, it would be perfectly reasonable to have the big, powerful missiles ONLY explode if they successfully reach their target, or otherwise are purposefully detonated. After all, nukes won't explode unless they are correctly detonated, and I believe C4 won't either.

Zetoss
Posts: 340
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 07, 01:17

Post by Zetoss » Thu, 4. Jan 18, 07:16

Having a hard time seeing the proper dumbness of a dumbfire missile that curves and then goes in a straight line but the bigger issue with that is that it will be overly offset from what you were aiming at during launch. Another reason this is fairly pointless is that to hit anything with dumbfire missiles the target needs to either be mega slow (or not moving at all) and then you're in many cases firing at such huge range your normal weapons can't reach anyway and when it's a mobile target you're better off going for a dive attack and launch at the last moment before evading the blast yourself, this time you'll be flying in an arc so firing your own weapons (and any turrets returning fire) can cross the path of the missile even if it's vastly offset, then it's better to have the missile going in as straight a line as possible so you can be sure it will hit the right spot. Sure some players can compensate and still hit with offsets but I'm betting many will find it maddening.

I won't claim to be a weapons expert or chemist but C4 and many other very powerful explosives are indeed safe to handle and even light on fire, they are however instantly activated by any powerful enough shockwave and getting hit by really powerful energy weapons (just like in the ones in X games) should set them off no problem. Nuclear weapons have very little to do with chemical explosives, simply smack two separately just barely non-critical mass pieces of plutonium together and it goes boom, but I strongly discourage civilians debating specifics of the anatomy of nuclear bombs so let's leave that topic at that.

At any rate I'm against putting a ton of failsafes in missiles, it takes the fun out of shooting incoming ones and feels just wrong, missiles are better off representing good and proper massively destructive danger and require the proper tactical use instead of being toys you can throw around carelessly. If you must insist on safety measures I could possibly be convinced premature detonations could have a smaller blast due to the payload being set off incorrectly but having it not go off at all is unacceptable. Go fireworks!

User avatar
Killjaeden
Posts: 5023
Joined: Sun, 3. Sep 06, 18:19

Post by Killjaeden » Thu, 4. Jan 18, 17:19

Zetoss wrote:but I strongly discourage civilians debating specifics of the anatomy of nuclear bombs so let's leave that topic at that.
*groan* really?
Everyone can read that stuff up on wikipedia...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
Image
Image
XTC Mod Team Veteran. My current work:
Image

Zetoss
Posts: 340
Joined: Tue, 18. Dec 07, 01:17

Post by Zetoss » Sat, 6. Jan 18, 04:42

You seem to be wildly misinterpreting what I'm saying so I'll spell it out in plain text before any cool kids show up and start firing away.

Reading about dangerous topics and staying informed in general is no problem, sit on Wikipedia all day if you like.

Actually writing and talking about certain things is inappropriate in certain situations and places. Getting fired up and posting details about the workings of weapons of mass destruction on a peaceful game forum is probably not prohibited but doesn't set a nice tone. Generally getting worked up and getting into a lot of details about stuff like that anywhere online will quite easily get you tagged as potential terrorist by several agencies around the world and then they are forced to waste time checking what kind of hentai you browse for half a year to verify that you aren't dangerous instead of investigating real threats, this doesn't benefit anyone (except bad guys) in the long run. In a way you can compare it to standing outside a police station and whispering to random people passing by about how easy it is to murder people and dispose of evidence. Before anyone starts calling me paranoid; the internet is constantly being scanned for key words and phrases to help investigators find threats before it's too late, trip enough alarms and you WILL get tagged for investigation, this isn't a secret.

I think this is quite enough off topic, no more replies from me regarding this unpleasant subject.

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19

Post by mr.WHO » Sat, 6. Jan 18, 11:23

Zetoss wrote: At any rate I'm against putting a ton of failsafes in missiles, it takes the fun out of shooting incoming ones and feels just wrong, missiles are better off representing good and proper massively destructive danger and require the proper tactical use instead of being toys you can throw around carelessly. If you must insist on safety measures I could possibly be convinced premature detonations could have a smaller blast due to the payload being set off incorrectly but having it not go off at all is unacceptable. Go fireworks!
It is not fun constantly see that AI blow itself up 0.5 second after missile launch and even I often get myself killed with my own missile.
This made me not to use missiles in X2 and X3 and only use long range missiles in X-Rebirth.

ANYWAY can somebody from EGOSOFT answer my questions?

DavidGW
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat, 18. May 13, 06:40

Post by DavidGW » Sun, 7. Jan 18, 15:58

If I wasn't clear with what I meant about the missiles curving, then all I mean is that the missile should be pushed away from the vehicle before its rocket fires, which is exactly what happens with real aircraft. The perpendicular motion could be stopped after a while. However even if it wasn't, it would not cause much change in the impact point, as it would be much smaller than the forward speed. Especially as it's a dumb fire missile that is unlikely to be accurate anyway. The main thing is it gets it out of the path of your other, faster projectiles.

About the other thing, I just think we need to all remember that we are discussing a game that regularly involves shooting and destroying other spaceships (i.e. killing), sometimes dealing in drugs, slaves, and piracy. I don't see how discussing high school physics even rates as a taboo subject compared to this.

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”