|
Post by concretedonkey on Oct 27, 2016 16:52:58 GMT
Yeah, 250 is relatively new for me too, it started with those laser escorts that I'm talking about, I realised that in a real situation no one is going to just wait for the missiles to close if he or she has the ability to burn them so I bumped up the range of all my lasers, even the small ones to 250. This resulted that even missiles that I considered effective before were missing by a large margin and drying themselves in the process. Also even small lasers, deployed on drones were effective at extreme ranges if deployed in large numbers. Result is that now my only shipbourne missiles are defensive ones with secondary anti shipping capability and almost everything offensive is drone based. When you start at 250 , if the target does even a small burn it usually still results massive losses of my gun deployed small missiles with around 2.8km/s delta V.
The 5-6 km/s are doing great for the moment, but they are bigger and not gun deployed so I use a mix of both.
|
|
|
Post by nivik on Oct 27, 2016 17:12:39 GMT
In my experience, partial homing actually does re-start the missile's burn near the end of the flight path.
|
|
|
Post by jonen on Oct 27, 2016 17:56:43 GMT
In my experience, partial homing actually does re-start the missile's burn near the end of the flight path. That is my experience too, but it also appears that the AI is a bit late in doing so. When I have a stream of missiles, launched from a ship in the combat, or have manually set them up to stream in, I find that setting all the missiles to full homing as soon as the first missiles on controlled homing starts doing their terminal approach burn, I get more hits from the missiles in the middle of the group, while the controlled homing group tends to miss, and the tail end of the group may end up burning through all their deltaV while the enemy can still maneuver. That is of course assuming any of the missiles that hit don't impart enough momentum (say, by opening a propellant tank) to send the target to "safety". OTOH, since the missiles are generally going for the radiators around the reactor and/or the main thrusters as the hottest part of the target, maneuver kills that leave the enemy unable to dodge the rest of the stream are not uncommon once you start getting hits. Manually setting up streams could be easier. As is, split groups individually or in groups of five, and use the keyboard shortcuts rather than using the menu. H for full homing, C for controlled, space for cancel orders, etc.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Oct 28, 2016 1:19:03 GMT
The main problem controlled homing has, in my opinion, is that its reserve fraction is too small. It'll often save maybe 10% of its total dV, which isn't enough to do jack squat most of the time, especially after coasting more than two seconds.
This is compounded by the initial burn pointing the rocket at where the target was when the burn stopped, instead of setting up a ballistic intercept, so that tiny dV reserve is going to be spent entirely trying to course-correct for all the movement the target did while the missile was coasting.
If it saved a larger fraction of its fuel, and set up a ballistic intercept in the initial burn (so the terminal burn could spend more time accelerating and less time course-correcting), it would be a lot more reliable.
|
|
|
Post by illectro on Oct 28, 2016 17:19:58 GMT
I've finally got the hang of lining up the intercepts, there's a bug in the intercept display where if you zoom in you'll see the intercept marker is offset from the orbit, so if you get the intercept marker exactly on top of the target then you'll always miss, but if you line up the intercept by eyeballing the last correctly rendered orbit then you can generally get close enough to make an intercept. But I wish that bug would get fixed.
Also if you select the intercept or a flyby maneuver then it'll stop the maneuver happening as soon as you get in weapons range, so I keep going back to manually adjusting the encounter using the buggy encounter interface. (To be fair, Kerbal Space Program struggled with similar problems with encounter range calculations).
Clearing those bugs would help a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by dpidz0r on Oct 29, 2016 2:39:41 GMT
Also if you select the intercept or a flyby maneuver then it'll stop the maneuver happening as soon as you get in weapons range, so I keep going back to manually adjusting the encounter using the buggy encounter interface. Are you still trying to adjust the encounter with the planet set as reference? Once you have the rough encounter set up, it's immensely easier to switch reference to the object you're trying to encounter and fine tune it that way. You can even set up last minute burns to get your relative velocity to precisely what you want it to be for that particular battle. Here's an example of how I do it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=iczQS2olvXM&t=9m5s
|
|
|
Post by RA2lover on Oct 29, 2016 15:49:29 GMT
The problem i see with controlled homing is you're going to need more delta-v if you try to do corrections late into the flight path.
You'd get better performance with "relative velocity neutral homing" where the missile performs corrections as soon as errors appear but doesn't try to continuously accelerate towards its target. Controlled homing could be basically full homing switching to that once it gets within "target is likely to spend about as much delta-v throughout the intercept window as what i have left" distance.
|
|
|
Post by illectro on Nov 1, 2016 16:45:04 GMT
Also if you select the intercept or a flyby maneuver then it'll stop the maneuver happening as soon as you get in weapons range, so I keep going back to manually adjusting the encounter using the buggy encounter interface. Are you still trying to adjust the encounter with the planet set as reference? Once you have the rough encounter set up, it's immensely easier to switch reference to the object you're trying to encounter and fine tune it that way. You can even set up last minute burns to get your relative velocity to precisely what you want it to be for that particular battle. Here's an example of how I do it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=iczQS2olvXM&t=9m5sI'm quite capable of setting up the encounter and exploiting all the reference frames, but there is a bug that puts the encounter marker in the wrong place (you can see the bug here )
|
|
|
Post by dpidz0r on Nov 3, 2016 14:40:54 GMT
Are you still trying to adjust the encounter with the planet set as reference? Once you have the rough encounter set up, it's immensely easier to switch reference to the object you're trying to encounter and fine tune it that way. You can even set up last minute burns to get your relative velocity to precisely what you want it to be for that particular battle. Here's an example of how I do it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=iczQS2olvXM&t=9m5sI'm quite capable of setting up the encounter and exploiting all the reference frames, but there is a bug that puts the encounter marker in the wrong place (you can see the bug here ) I know you know how to use reference frames. I wasn't referring to the bug so much as that in a previous video it looked like you were setting up your encounters in the most painful way possible Though if you guide it in with your target set as reference, it mitigates the bug somewhat as it's easier to guesstimate where the marker is supposed to be. Especially if you can manage to glimpse which way the marker shifts while the turn is advancing.
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Nov 3, 2016 17:58:32 GMT
I was wondering that as well. Switching reference frame and camera to the target allows to set encounters and refine them more easily.
|
|
|
Post by illectro on Nov 3, 2016 19:20:01 GMT
Working in the central body reference frame is much better when you're trying to work on minimizing the time, target centered reference frame is better at tuning the intercept.
|
|
|
Post by boomertiro on Nov 3, 2016 23:05:55 GMT
And always try to get as much done in early burns as possible. But our good mister Scoot Movely knows this.
|
|
|
Post by calvin on Nov 5, 2016 20:33:22 GMT
One thing I noticed about your most recent episode (5?) is that it seemed like your main defense against drones was trying to shoot them down before they got to you, or by doing clever maneuvers that the AI had a hard time responding to.
My counter to both incoming drones and missiles was to launch a fleet of 5 stinger drones and 5 striker nuclear missiles in response to each enemy drone or missile fleet. From there, I tried to get as direct an encounter as possible. Once they did have the encounter and got into combat enemy missiles would detect the drones as an enemy fleet and then seek directly too them. Granted, this loses me 5 drones but nearly every missile in that fleet is going to blow itself up. I killed 20 and 30 size missile fleets with that trick. With enemy drones on the other hand they'd also detect my drones as a valid target and so they'd all start shooting at each-other. When the enemy drones got close enough or ran low on dV I'd let my missiles start homing and even 1 nuke was usually enough to kill the drones since they were clustered so close together.
I managed to finish the missile without ever getting my capital ships into combat directly. It was all long range missiles and drones. Granted, my fleet was 3 modified siloships with the armour stripped off, 25 stinger drones each, and then as many nukes as I could fit in.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 7, 2016 0:28:39 GMT
One thing I noticed about your most recent episode (5?) is that it seemed like your main defense against drones was trying to shoot them down before they got to you, or by doing clever maneuvers that the AI had a hard time responding to. My counter to both incoming drones and missiles was to launch a fleet of 5 stinger drones and 5 striker nuclear missiles in response to each enemy drone or missile fleet. From there, I tried to get as direct an encounter as possible. Once they did have the encounter and got into combat enemy missiles would detect the drones as an enemy fleet and then seek directly too them. Granted, this loses me 5 drones but nearly every missile in that fleet is going to blow itself up. I killed 20 and 30 size missile fleets with that trick. With enemy drones on the other hand they'd also detect my drones as a valid target and so they'd all start shooting at each-other. When the enemy drones got close enough or ran low on dV I'd let my missiles start homing and even 1 nuke was usually enough to kill the drones since they were clustered so close together. I managed to finish the missile without ever getting my capital ships into combat directly. It was all long range missiles and drones. Granted, my fleet was 3 modified siloships with the armour stripped off, 25 stinger drones each, and then as many nukes as I could fit in. You don't even need to lose a drone/missile. Just manually use the move order to dodge projectiles and missiles, and your missile/drone will live on to ruin another fleet of missiles or drones. This will hopefully be fixed, though.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Nov 7, 2016 0:40:57 GMT
I think the best advice I can give for now is "get into the ship/module designer, and liberate yourself from the pitiful stock ships!" Though I can think of something else specifically for Vesta Overkill: use missiles to screen drones. When you put missiles and drones in the same fleet, the missiles will always start the encounter in front. The missiles will soak up the enemy's lasers, the drones will ignore the enemy's flares. It's the foolproof way to defeat Cutters. Use target priority to make the drones kill the Cutters first, which will leave the enemy fleet completely defenseless against follow-up attacks.
|
|