|
|
Post by The Genocide God on Dec 19, 2016 6:56:18 GMT
I've been playing around with my KKV missiles since the latest patch. They've had their hit probability massively reduced, which I think is attributable to the addition of sensor inaccuracy due to diffraction. Given that the missile sensor package is currently abstracted, how is the capability of its sensors determined? Is there any way to decrease the inaccuracy of missile sensors?
|
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 19, 2016 7:18:08 GMT
I think it's not sensors, but some changes in the guidance logic, I noticed missiles behaving differently.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Genocide God on Dec 19, 2016 22:27:52 GMT
Well the patch notes didn't list any changes to guidance algorithms, and there doesn't appear to have been any changes made to the settings in the remote control unit. Of the changes listed the only one I think could affect the guidance behaviour is the sensor inaccuracy.
|
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Dec 19, 2016 23:11:56 GMT
It's possible that the sensor change also changed the guidance system a bit.
Maybe tweaking them again and see what happens?
|
|
|
|
Post by morrigi on Dec 21, 2016 6:04:33 GMT
My KKVs hit just fine. Have you tried higher damping on the terminal guidance phase?
|
|
|
|
Post by shurugal on Dec 21, 2016 13:16:03 GMT
My KKVs hit just fine. Have you tried higher damping on the terminal guidance phase? can confirm, mine still core ships nicely. |
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Dec 21, 2016 13:22:22 GMT
My missile still hit the enemy ship reliably but they seems to wobble MUCH more than it used to.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Genocide God on Dec 22, 2016 9:03:41 GMT
Yeah I tried increasing the damping but that didn't have the desired effect. After reducing the gimbal angle for the engine however, I was able to stop the missiles wobbling which has restored most of their former accuracy. The same effect was present in the earlier patch, but I was able to eliminate it without reducing the gimbal angle nearly as much.
|
|
|
|
Post by amimai on Dec 22, 2016 11:53:29 GMT
odd, why don't missiles predict intercept using something like this? missiles using predictive guidance shouldn't need to change course often, why would there be so much wobble? even proportional navigation with a tiny tolerance should not really result in much wobble... |
|
acatalepsy
Junior Member
Not Currently In Space
Posts: 97 
|
Post by acatalepsy on Dec 22, 2016 14:55:16 GMT
missiles using predictive guidance shouldn't need to change course often, why would there be so much wobble? Possibly an error in the approximation, brought on by the need to compromise for performance reasons. The same reason we sometimes get more than 100% efficient railguns. |
|
|
|
Post by amimai on Dec 22, 2016 17:40:06 GMT
missiles using predictive guidance shouldn't need to change course often, why would there be so much wobble? Possibly an error in the approximation, brought on by the need to compromise for performance reasons. The same reason we sometimes get more than 100% efficient railguns. but if we are using cheap dθ proportional navigation calculations there still should not be any wobble unless the target is accelerating at very high rates it looks like there is either a bug in the pathing code causing the missile to constantly overcompensate its turn or the proportional navigation code is too low tolerance and the missile never acquires a desired heading |
|
