|
Post by argonbalt on Sept 16, 2016 19:03:28 GMT
so i have some genera ideas regarding combat and ship design. They break down as following. 1: A target nudge option in ship command. Now this is already half implemented with the "reorient" option. I half been building and testing huge marauder style ships equipped with coil and rail guns. When i go into combat i encounter a recurring problem. They often fire at maximum range, but are always just a few decametres off target. I then have to set my ship to active or controlled homing to properly target. when this works (which at this point is around 35% of the time) the beam of speedy death finally lines up and hits the target. The issue is that i have to sacrifice precious distance and give the enemy a growing proximity of range to engage me. clearly the ability to move like ten metres left and three up is not within the parameters of the firing computer. Since realism is still the ideal goal here, i feel like this is when the on board ship fire control master would take over and be able to "nudge" the shots. This is already a historical tactic for fighter pilots, who have to centre their guns and instead lead their shots. Clearly the ai was never designed to compensate and correct for 200km ranges, or the fact that a ship might casually move to the side. I know space has allot of distance and that those few seconds could mean tens of km, but i feel like shooting the duck with them fast bits what come out the pointy end AHEAD of were it will be based on it's current velocity and acceleration should be done. A manual nudge mode, or some sort of auto correct for a lead pursuit instead of missing because it is stuck on pure imperialnews.network/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/pursuit-curves.jpg2: Have frontal armour be a space, not just a single slot. This would help in mounting many types of weapons on the smallest area possible on the front of the ship. 3: default turret angle, a default angle the turret is set to, but is free to rotate from in combat.
|
|
|
Post by qswitched on Sept 16, 2016 20:56:54 GMT
So, weapons currently do lead their targets. They do not, however, account for enemy acceleration (via dodging), which is what your are seeing. The trouble with trying to anticipate dodging/acceleration is there is a huge amount of dodging options for the enemy to take. Simply spinning a ship is very fast way of dodging anything if your ship is long and thin (as long as the enemy is not targeting your center of mass).
The longer the range, the easier it gets to dodge because of the delay time between when as shot launches and when it hits, which is why this issue appears at 200 km ranges. I could add in leading based on the way the enemy is currently dodging, but then it would make sense to simply have the enemy always switch how they dodge every second or so.
#2 is a heavily requested feature, I intend to get to this at some point. #3 sounds interesting, though it would require two angles, pitch and yaw. I'm curious what the use case for it is?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Sept 17, 2016 2:13:31 GMT
So, weapons currently do lead their targets. They do not, however, account for enemy acceleration (via dodging), which is what your are seeing. The trouble with trying to anticipate dodging/acceleration is there is a huge amount of dodging options for the enemy to take. Simply spinning a ship is very fast way of dodging anything if your ship is long and thin (as long as the enemy is not targeting your center of mass). The longer the range, the easier it gets to dodge because of the delay time between when as shot launches and when it hits, which is why this issue appears at 200 km ranges. I could add in leading based on the way the enemy is currently dodging, but then it would make sense to simply have the enemy always switch how they dodge every second or so. #2 is a heavily requested feature, I intend to get to this at some point. #3 sounds interesting, though it would require two angles, pitch and yaw. I'm curious what the use case for it is? I like that idea for #1, obviously you would not want to put the game into intense easy mode. My main reason is coming off of flight sims and leading and landing a super long range shot is unquestionably satisfying, most of the time when it misses it does so along a linear path where in the target ship is accelerating or strafing linearly sideways in one direction. I feel like automating it fully would be too on the easy side of thing, unless the enemy also had randomised strafing, in which case you open up a whole new bag of worms where battles not only have intense fighting but the roll, scatter, re orient, (actually this is where i think i should mention that a dedicated strafe function is needed to differentiate between reorienting the whole ship and using retranslation instead of only reorientation, but i digress) become intensely important and you now have something akin to orbital Air Combat Manoeuvres(awesome but holy shit tense). Im not sure if you would be cool with such a huge set of overhauls, which is why i suggested the more moderate nudge option to help land shots. I mean automating everything would be nuts, you would need like super manoeuvrable CIWS ships to act as some sort of in between for ships and drones, like the cutter. It sounds very cool in my head but you are the king of this project so it's up to you. -Automated lead/pure/lag pursuit options /w/ automated dodging= very cool but very costly on the D/v Perhaps a setting of pursuit options would also benefit those trying the rail-gun missile tactic? Like wise a set of evasive movement options (none/moderate/extreme) coupled with the current jumble of roll/re orient/ etc Manual aiming would be fun for one gun at a time used in conjunction with the ai to help land shots, i think it would feel very "space captain" ish I realise im just vomiting ideas at this point. As for #2 pretty straight forward and for #3 mainly to help ships with corner mounts on the outer hull, i have been experimenting with Marauder variants and have found that the current placement of turrets makes them only 50% as use full, as they can only point out (if mounted forward they clash with the main coilgun, and even without the coilgun they still only cover a rough 180 frontal arch). So that got me thinking about corner, or even nutso spacer mounted cannons. I mean think about it if you could effectively corner mount a frontal/side wise cannon you would cut down on the number of turrets (and horrible weight) your ship would need. Add in a support brace that extends from the hull and now not only does the turret have a 360o firing angle(save for the ships dead-zone, which it is attached to) You would also space out your cannons on gun pod like mounts making your frontal target larger but also less centralised, as the pole turrets would (if fired upon) draw shots away from the central hull. This all leads to what just popped in my head as #4: Side mountable spacers(or i guess struts now?) not directly mounted into the central "spine" stack. These could hold a number of useful designs, everything from a nuclear generator separated outside the hull, sparing radiation effects for the crew, radiators mounted away from the hull so as to not endanger other components if lost(also they look like cool space wings wowey zowey space!) to the aforementioned turrets or flare launchers or missile launcher etc. I suppose tensile strength would need to be considered as well as centre of mass. OH ALSO! OFF BODY THRUSTERS! Like the star furies in Babylon five! yielding much faster rotation and translation speeds. Armouring the struts would ideally be done directly to the unit and not with the current full body main armour layer. few ok that's all i can think of for now, i guess this is my ideas thread?
|
|
|
Post by morrigi on Sept 28, 2016 20:42:20 GMT
Yeah, I would really like to see structural parts that could be side-mounted, it would really open up a lot of design decisions. That, dedicated spinal mounts, and a testing mode for weapons and spacecraft are some of the things I want to see most in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Gore on Sept 29, 2016 16:34:45 GMT
For what it's worth, I too would love to see these types of attach points. As mentioned from a tactical standpoint, it'd give enemies something else to shoot at, and would open up the possibility of adding "spaced armor", a "cigar in a cigar" thing.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Oct 10, 2016 18:58:54 GMT
Yeah, I would really like to see structural parts that could be side-mounted, it would really open up a lot of design decisions. I second this (below: Escondidian battleships from Infinite Space). The guns can be made very large without increasing the length and unwieldiness of the ship anywhere near the extent that would be if they were on the nose (speaking of which though, how about an option for mounting guns internally so only a hole sticks out the nose looking like a submarine torpedo tube?). Concept art depicts these guns' mounts as capable of traversing independently by a few degrees, so the ship doesn't have to constantly make thrust pulses to stay on target, but I don't know how realistic that is considering their scale and mass.
|
|
|
Post by cuddlefish on Oct 11, 2016 16:20:55 GMT
I think part of why the gun mounts are external only is that the clear assumption is that the gun is dumping heat via the barrel - containing that in the ship should logically require additional radiators, so you'd need to do some work to make sure it's generating the right amount of additional workload at the right temperature. I'd assume it's in pipeline, but there's a lot on the docket already.
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 11, 2016 20:24:13 GMT
So, weapons currently do lead their targets. They do not, however, account for enemy acceleration (via dodging), which is what your are seeing. The trouble with trying to anticipate dodging/acceleration is there is a huge amount of dodging options for the enemy to take. Simply spinning a ship is very fast way of dodging anything if your ship is long and thin (as long as the enemy is not targeting your center of mass). The longer the range, the easier it gets to dodge because of the delay time between when as shot launches and when it hits, which is why this issue appears at 200 km ranges. I could add in leading based on the way the enemy is currently dodging, but then it would make sense to simply have the enemy always switch how they dodge every second or so. #2 is a heavily requested feature, I intend to get to this at some point. #3 sounds interesting, though it would require two angles, pitch and yaw. I'm curious what the use case for it is? Well one thing which would be amazing especially for nuke cannons and coil guns would be the ability to just spread out a shot gun of shots all around the enemies velocity vector. As with nuke ammo all you really care about is getting a few shots in the general vicinity of the target. As such if you could just order your cannons to fire all around where the enemy might be in a massive spread with nuclear ammo it would still be very effective and remove any real ability to dodge. You can currently sort of do that with a really inaccurate coilgun firing nukes but that is a suboptimal solution.
|
|