Return to “General”

Post

Combat

#46
I am sorry if this has been talked about before, I have not been here in a while.

I am not sure how possible it is at this stage in the game but I've had this thought before and I feel it was validated by josh this last video.

LT looks hard as frak. :monkey:

I also am getting old. Is there any way we could have a few different modes in combat? perhaps some ship assisted aiming or nav. I don't even know what kind of help I would want lol. I managed to play a little of the very early demo, and from all the combat I've seen I have the sneaking suspicion I'm going to get desolated in combat. You know it might be pretty cool to make them an actual physical system in the ship so players that didn't need the assist could remove them for more computing power or armor or what have you.

Just a stray thought but as usual the game looks amazing and beautiful and I can't wait for it. Even if I suck at it!
Post

Re: Combat

#47
I the last video Josh stated something along the lines that the combat seemed too hard right now and something about lowering the AI accuracy.

AI target accuracy is of course one area where the AI has to be gimped a little. The amount of gimping could be set via a difficultly setting perhaps?
Demon wrote: I also am getting old.
...also, I can relate.

I am pretty sure I am in the top 10% of poster age range here.
Last edited by DWMagus on Mon Jul 07, 2014 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Double post
My Signature
Post

Re: Combat

#48
Welcome to the forums :wave: . Where the butter is unsalted :shifty: . Josh is planning on putting in separate modes, perhaps there may be an easier version of the combat A.I in one of those modes :think: .
Image The results of logic, of natural progression? Boring! An expected result? Dull! An obvious next step? Pfui! Where is the fun in that? A dream may soothe, but our nightmares make us run!
Post

Re: Combat

#49
Also as a another smaller point, when we get a bit higher, we can buy robots that will Mann our gunns, I will especially like this because I love maneuvering and dodging, and having someone else shoot could make that very fun! Imagine running away from police or raiders while giving commands to your tail gunner and recording status updates also by another fleet of your coming in and shooting the crap out of your followers. This comment is larger than needed but I can't wait for LT strategising!
Post

Re: Combat

#50
Spenc12 wrote:Also as a another smaller point, when we get a bit higher, we can buy robots that will Mann our gunns, I will especially like this because I love maneuvering and dodging, and having someone else shoot could make that very fun! Imagine running away from police or raiders while giving commands to your tail gunner and recording status updates also by another fleet of your coming in and shooting the crap out of your followers. This comment is larger than needed but I can't wait for LT strategising!
And when we get even higher, we can hire AI to manage divisions of our army, so we can focus on managing our own ship to make a difference, instead of micromanaging our army all the time. I for one, am extremely excited to see some strategy in LT as well, and am hoping that we'll see it soon (hopefully in the next update!).
Brian makes Art! Check out http://bk-creations.deviantart.com/ for more information! Suggestions are appreciated!

In Josh we trust.
Post

Re: Combat Gameplay Discussion

#53
Regarding Recoil:
Talvieno wrote:
A definite downside to kinetic weapons on a starfighter is that they would impart momentum to the fighter or change its mass properties. Very large cannons or missiles might therefore be impractical, unless the fighter can quickly compensate for what is essentially a large rocket firing.
I'm all for this. It's an excellent example of the "problem" type of decision: It makes you have to weigh the pros and cons of all-out firing. Something similar to this you see in a lot of games are weapon cooldown times (Mass Effect 1, for instance), and ammo clips. Weapon recoil strong enough to slow your ship down would be an excellent reason to leave the heavy guns for the larger ships, and make you really have to weigh your options before you start all-out firing, especially if you're trying to chase someone down.
Nope, does not have to be. If you want to design a kinetic weapon for space you should consider a Recoilless rifle. This should not alter your momentum while firing. (But the mass still changes)

Pros:
- No Recoil, no change in momentum
- Ship gets more agile while fitting

Contra:
- Bigger thermal signature
- Munition is heavy, more mass, less manoeuvrability (at the beginning, compared with other weapons)

.. just my 2 cents
:D
Post

Re: Combat Gameplay Discussion

#54
N-Joy wrote: Pros:
- No Recoil, no change in momentum
- Ship gets more agile while fitting

Contra:
- Bigger thermal signature
- Munition is heavy, more mass, less manoeuvrability (at the beginning, compared with other weapons)

.. just my 2 cents
-horrible efficiency as you have to create 2 times the impulse you want to transfer on your enemy.

You have to fire a projectile in the opposite direction you are shooting, as a recoilless rifle has air as reaction mass in atmosphere, but in space you have to expell reaction mass, aka another projectile.

Also: second projectile which flies in the opposite direction, friendly fire ahoi.

if the same gun is to create the counter impulse it would have to be a spinal weapon, to not hit the spacecraft with the counter shot.
Post

Re: Combat Gameplay Discussion

#55
Since when is efficiency important in a game with unlimited energy supply on ships?
Afaik you don't run out of fuel neither of energy - even after using (mining) lasers for hours.

I'm not sure about the reaction mass,
imo firing a weapon produces all the gas needed for the specific impulse "backwards". If it does not, then scientists will find a way :P
And if even this doesn't work out, the second gun doesn't need to have a projectile, just something similar with the same mass. Look it out in the wiki-link, this idea already exists before World War I

Cornflakes_91 wrote:i have to say once again: real space combat is boring as hell
....
real life space combat is one of the worst possible things to do in trying make something fun to play.
aha. so keep it simple.

My Suggestion: Kinetic weapons have no recoil at all, or it can be reduced to (almost) zero by research.
:D
Post

Re: Combat Gameplay Discussion

#56
N-Joy wrote:Since when is efficiency important in a game with unlimited energy supply on ships?
Afaik you don't run out of fuel neither of energy - even after using (mining) lasers for hours.
energy and power are 2 different things.

your main reactor may can output a megawatt for indefinite timespans, but your high power (many many watts) storages can only store limited amounts of energy (watt seconds)
so every watt second you dont have to spend means smaller capacitors and lower needed throughput of your reactor (for a given firerate)

if we had unlimited power we wouldnt need any power management in the game ;)

also: for guns using chemical propellants efficiency also counts, as higher efficiency means smaller propellant charges means smaller/lighter ammunition means more ammunition you can carry around.

so if you waste half of the impulse your weapon could provide, you either waste damage potential or room aboard your ship.
and both is precious ;)
N-Joy wrote: I'm not sure about the reaction mass,
imo firing a weapon produces all the gas needed for the specific impulse "backwards". If it does not, then scientists will find a way :P
you have the energy, but likely not the reaction mass to do it.
a recoilless rifle also uses a big batch of reaction mass to push against, the atmosphere.


the biggest problem with using only one (non spinal) gun is:
where do you lead the counter impulse around the ship?

if its just shooting out of the gun its very likely that the recoiling gas will simply hit your hull, negating all the advantages it had (it imparts even more impulse as it canceled out when the gas doesnt stick to your hull)

N-Joy wrote: And if even this doesn't work out, the second gun doesn't need to have a projectile, just something similar with the same mass.
mass times velocity.

maybe a tiny bit of gas that you accelerate to high speeds... wait.
we already have that.

engines :P
N-Joy wrote: Look it out in the wiki-link, this idea already exists before World War I
i know that the concept is old.

and i've already spent far too much time on wikipedia reading about weapons :lol:

N-Joy wrote:
Cornflakes_91 wrote: i have to say once again: real space combat is boring as hell
....
real life space combat is one of the worst possible things to do in trying make something fun to play.
aha. so keep it simple.

My Suggestion: Kinetic weapons have no recoil at all, or it can be reduced to (almost) zero by research.
  1. that was mainly ment for things like distance, speeds, ranges etc.
    everything that comes down to "how far are we away from each other and how fast can we travel"
    because thats where sci fi combat gets boring
    there are no dogfights in space, just firing missles and praying ;)
  2. hey, you started with realism arguments :lol:
Last edited by Cornflakes_91 on Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron