Re: Missiles in the games
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:02 pm
N810 wrote:Don't forget chaff...
N810 wrote:Don't forget chaff...
"Crap you throw out the back of your ship to distract missiles"N810 wrote:Don't forget chaff...
Which doesnt quite work in fighter vs fighter combat when theres a big clump of death on your tailN810 wrote: Also you could probably bjust shoot it with another missile or your gun.
Yeah, for those hardkill systems will likely work better.N810 wrote:I was referring to the big slow long range torpedoes.
Well, we could (once again) ask the guys from Egosoft. They had swarm homing missiles. If a few were enough to kill the target, the others searched for a new one.BFett wrote:Wouldn't most missile swarms only consist of at most 10-20 missiles where the group of missiles is handled as an individual object with destroy-able parts? This is how most games handle it in the MW franchise and I bet it works in a very similar way in RTS games.
So, in game a ship with 10 missile launchers which fire groups of 20 missiles a piece could be possible. The ship could fire all 200 missiles at the same time and all of the missiles could be tracked accurately and without sacrificing performance. This same technology could be applies to space mines as well with the only difference being the spacing between the objects.
i have no idea how you got from "group many missiles into single objects" to swarm missile AIJanB1 wrote: Well, we could (once again) ask the guys from Egosoft. They had swarm homing missiles. If a few were enough to kill the target, the others searched for a new one.
why would missile swarms be limited to 10-20 missiles?BFett wrote:Wouldn't most missile swarms only consist of at most 10-20 missiles where the group of missiles is handled as an individual object with destroy-able parts?
Because that "bubble" technique wouldn't really work with that. Or it would just be really hard because you would have to group missiles with the same target to one group, and whenever they search a new target you have to make a new group to make this "bubble".Cornflakes_91 wrote:i have no idea how you got from "group many missiles into single objects" to swarm missile AIJanB1 wrote: Well, we could (once again) ask the guys from Egosoft. They had swarm homing missiles. If a few were enough to kill the target, the others searched for a new one.
That's actually a pretty creative idea.Cornflakes_91 wrote:in light of the missile swarm performance considerations, could we abstract big missile swarms as field functions?
yeah, field function is maybe not the right term.Flatfingers wrote:That's actually a pretty creative idea.Cornflakes_91 wrote:in light of the missile swarm performance considerations, could we abstract big missile swarms as field functions?
My immediate guess is that fields will make more sense either for A) overlapping continuous areas/volumes consisting of numeric "strengths" radiating from central points, with falloff governed by some simple mathematical function (such as an exponential), or B) an area/volume containing many thousands, or tens or hundreds of thousands, of invisible point effects.
If that guess is near accurate, then the field notion might not be the best solution for 200-500 visible objects. If it got closer to 10,000 missiles at a time then a field starts to look better, but I still don't know how it handles the fact that missiles generally ? need to be rendered on-screen.
Just thinking out loud; contradict at will.
Cornflakes_91 wrote:yeah, field function is maybe not the right term.Flatfingers wrote:That's actually a pretty creative idea.Cornflakes_91 wrote:in light of the missile swarm performance considerations, could we abstract big missile swarms as field functions?
My immediate guess is that fields will make more sense either for A) overlapping continuous areas/volumes consisting of numeric "strengths" radiating from central points, with falloff governed by some simple mathematical function (such as an exponential), or B) an area/volume containing many thousands, or tens or hundreds of thousands, of invisible point effects.
If that guess is near accurate, then the field notion might not be the best solution for 200-500 visible objects. If it got closer to 10,000 missiles at a time then a field starts to look better, but I still don't know how it handles the fact that missiles generally ? need to be rendered on-screen.
Just thinking out loud; contradict at will.
aggregate object may be a better word.
but the basic idea of "dont handle them individually" stays the same.
if that is workable we can get all the shiny things