Buff warhead damage/radius poll

[Zekester81]

Here is what I have on torpedoes. I used rotary type with 10 warhead blocks each. They generally destroy their own core when they go off, eliminating things floating around. Don't mind the poor quality and my voice cutting out, I need to set my software up right yet.


Collision damage with physical torpedoes could be quite an interesting thing. Something that wasn't mentioned is that they might need to have the thrust imparted upon the target they are colliding with reduced. If you noticed in my vid, the collision on test threw my range backwards at 108m/s after the collision. It might have been the engine of one torp still running while stuck in the target block though, it's hard to tell.

I'd say that warheads definitely need a buff. I wouldn't mind at all if it came for higher cost, it would be worth it. 3-4x buff would be great for with collision damage on, 10x or more if collision is off. I voted 50k and no radius, and IDK if 50k is enough but it would be a good starting point.

 

[AtraUnam]

Ok so from what I can see the discussion seems to be spliiting into two camps:

1. Straight up buff but maintain the difficulty in using them.
2. Buff damage but nerf the economy side of things in exchange for removing a large amount of the skill in using them.

I also see suggestions for a special computer to make ships ram when linked to bobby ai, why not just link a warhead to the AI and save ourselves a block ID?

 

[Nickizzy]

You can't protect this warhead from enemy PDT fire.

And then...
Advanced Armored torpedos arive....
Really. Most function pd turrets are 1:1 cannon/cannon guns. Do they even do damage* to Advanced armor?

The computer CONSTANTLY overrides AI, and disables shielding, I think.

Couldn't we just add "torpedo" AI mode? And shielding on a suiside ship ment to be mass produced would be sorta expensive. At that scale just add a few forcefield blocks around the movement and logic parts. If you really wanted to. That's what strategy is for. Give your torpedos a 220 shield for the 10-20 seconds it needs to reach it's target, or spend the money(600 each!) on a higher quantity or faster speed.

It would be nice if the missile setting on AI also targeted warheads.

The whole faction betrayer/greifers, and as a response to this:

Drive up the cost? Are you serius? Please tell me when you mine don´t use astronaut hands only, that thing it´s a K.I.S.S. way to implement a system where nobody can abuse using warheads being anonymous.

And for sure Big damage numbers at warheads means big warheads, not a "nuke" from 25 blocks.

Could we make "missile" setting PD turrets also target warheads. At a greater preference as the warheads go closer to the mothership? That could help a lot of the offline ninjas.

As for driving up the cost, faction blocks are 5k(?) each, and weigh a ton. Especially if you need to faction it to your faction. You would need to dig around every torpedo too, then. Maybe make an alert if a warhead damages one of your factioned ships, but at that point it would require a force large enough to distract pd, and then it's no greifer.

*because of the lightness and simplicity of torpedos the advanced armor would be a prime target. Center of mass targeting is exploted...

 

[Reilly Reese]

And then...
Advanced Armored torpedos arive....
Really. Most function pd turrets are 1:1 cannon/cannon guns. Do they even do damage* to Advanced armor?


Couldn't we just add "torpedo" AI mode? And shielding on a suiside ship ment to be mass produced would be sorta expensive. At that scale just add a few forcefield blocks around the movement and logic parts. If you really wanted to. That's what strategy is for. Give your torpedos a 220 shield for the 10-20 seconds it needs to reach it's target, or spend the money(600 each!) on a higher quantity or faster speed.

It would be nice if the missile setting on AI also targeted warheads.

The whole faction betrayer/greifers, and as a response to this:

Could we make "missile" setting PD turrets also target warheads. At a greater preference as the warheads go closer to the mothership? That could help a lot of the offline ninjas.

As for driving up the cost, faction blocks are 5k(?) each, and weigh a ton. Especially if you need to faction it to your faction. You would need to dig around every torpedo too, then. Maybe make an alert if a warhead damages one of your factioned ships, but at that point it would require a force large enough to distract pd, and then it's no greifer.

*because of the lightness and simplicity of torpedos the advanced armor would be a prime target. Center of mass targeting is exploted...

Most Point Defense turrets don't have the DPS to shut down any decently armored torpedo. They only do like 1 point of damage.

 

[Nickizzy]

Faction Module
Shop Base Price 2,000
Shop Dynamic Price 1,500

Yea... I kinda was a bit off on that one. I havent bought faction modules in a while.

don´t want to stop use anonymous torpedoes

I guess thats a really big debate because torpedos are great for secret raids, but how do you know who did it?

At this point I agree with you. Having a faction recognition on torpedos would be needed in order to balance it. Maybe instead of a faction module on each torpedo, each torpedo(ship with less than 30 blocks with a warhead) is set to the mothership's faction. It does not get any of the nonediting things that have a faction block gives you, but if it damages something it counts as that faction doing damage.

I just don't like needing such an extra block(and does it save faction signature on spawning? ) because of things like torpedo racks and such would need to be reconfigured a lot.

 

[Zekester81]

Most Point Defense turrets don't have the DPS to shut down any decently armored torpedo. They only do like 1 point of damage.

My torps are sheathed in advanced armor. The problem is that collision damage off = no cap on the warheads. They have to be exposed to hit the target, 1 damage will kill them. If you turn collision damage on to have more realistic torpedoes and the ability to put an armored cap on them, you will be in real trouble. Collision damage on is a mess right now. Turn it on and go try and undock anything that doesn't use the new exit rail without destroying both vehicles or causing serious damage. I wouldn't worry about advanced armor on torps so much until they get collision damage working right.

Edit: added quote I forgot. You don't seem to be able to add quotes from the mutliquote thing when editing which is a huge pain in the ass.

 

[Nickizzy]

Seriusly pal try to check again my point:

Anonymous warheads = Best Griefing tool ever.

Are you a Grieferdude?

Um

At this point I agree with you. Having a faction recognition on torpedos would be needed in order to balance it.
.

I said

Maybe instead of a faction module on each torpedo, each torpedo(ship with less than 30 blocks with a warhead) is set to the mothership's faction. It does not get any of the nonediting things that have a faction block gives you, but if it damages something it counts as that faction doing damage.

Later, and finally this at the end:

I just don't like needing such an extra block(and does it save faction signature on spawning? ) because of things like torpedo racks and such would need to be reconfigured a lot.

But how did I aprove secret greifers?

these faction thing its not for a balance its for a must have

I said this:

At this point I agree with you. Having a faction recognition on torpedos would be needed in order to balance it. Maybe instead of a faction module on each torpedo, each torpedo(ship with less than 30 blocks with a warhead) is set to the mothership's faction. It does not get any of the nonediting things that have a faction block gives you, but if it damages something it counts as that faction doing damage.
.

 

[Aynslei]

Why not have warheads require power like every other weapon block?

Have them act like a type of capacitor, the bigger the group of warheads the exponentially more power it can be charged with.
Have them be the same damage/power cost as other weapons just let them charge up far more power per block worth compared to weapon blocks. (Boom a proper place to start looking at balance)

A single 4 block kamikaze ship is not going to end up doing 300k damage, but a decent sized torpedo that was massively charged up from a mother-ships power reactor and delivered by a bomber could actually be allowed to perform well with massive nuke like damage.

The moment a player sets a warhead to start charging their ID is tacked onto it so a proper war-dec will be performed after it goes off. (I will not defend the people who want to continue exploiting this)

This could even allow people to make a self-destruct system that was not just a security risk. Uncharged warhead system through the ship wont be a sudden death issue, but taking the time and power needs to charge them up as your ship is on its last legs to go out with a bang.

 

[Madman198237]

Aynslei, I like the power capacitor idea.
Reminds of a scene from a Star Wars: X-Wing novel. Anyway.

The only caveat I'd add is to spread that ship self-destruct mechanism to EVERY weapon block, AND power capacitors. That way, your ship isn't always loaded with unnecessary self-killing machinery.

Allow these blocks to continue collect power (And allow generators to generate power) after the ship is overheated. Clear their "overload" (Why not call it that?) charge when the core is rebooted. That way, if you build your system right, the enemy is boarding a timed explosive. They must reach the ship core before these blocks reach some critical energy content (After x time spent charging/x power collected) and then explode.


Of course, to make this charging system via mothership good, we need a method to use cross-entity rail docking/transference of docked entities. Then you can load a bomber with a nuke and send it to kill things.

 

[Nickizzy]

Why not have warheads require power like every other weapon block?

Have them act like a type of capacitor, the bigger the group of warheads the exponentially more power it can be charged with.
Have them be the same damage/power cost as other weapons just let them charge up far more power per block worth compared to weapon blocks. (Boom a proper place to start looking at balance)

A single 4 block kamikaze ship is not going to end up doing 300k damage, but a decent sized torpedo that was massively charged up from a mother-ships power reactor and delivered by a bomber could actually be allowed to perform well with massive nuke like damage.

The moment a player sets a warhead to start charging their ID is tacked onto it so a proper war-dec will be performed after it goes off. (I will not defend the people who want to continue exploiting this)

This could even allow people to make a self-destruct system that was not just a security risk. Uncharged warhead system through the ship wont be a sudden death issue, but taking the time and power needs to charge them up as your ship is on its last legs to go out with a bang.

So would the charge up time be like some of the mine weapon ideas I've seen out there? Where each warhead consumes 10 power and overloads 1, every second, until destroied. It's a really good idea in that they can start out weak, but over time in a player loaded sector the can almost "ferment" or grow denser in power.

I guess this would be good for deliberate attacks by factions and players, and would limit greifers by making a time delay for them to base their attacks off of.

 

[Nickizzy]

Look at what Lecic came up with! Recognized by Council - Warhead Launcher Weapon

[Would you like this system?]

 

[Sgtwisky]

From reading, I can see there is a bit of a divide. There are those who want only "Honorable" combat between factions, and those who want "Underhanded" methods to be available. Personally I lean towards underhanded. Not because I like to grief, but they make very fun and interesting tactics. Both to consider from an attackers perspective and a defenders. So what some here call "Abuse" some of us call "Creative Use" of the tools at your disposal.

Personalty I am all for the ability to use Gorilla tactics / Covert tactics / whatever you want to call em. Maybe we could have a config value for that?

Going off of my previous post, maybe you could have a server config value to make it so you can't place warheads on an unfactioned ship? This would allow servers to be "Hardcore PvP" vs "Honorable PvP". Players could just gravitate towards which ever they prefer. When a factioned warhead hits a ship, you get a war declaration, but on a server that allows "unfactioned warheads" you will have more sneaky attacks with them.

Just my 2 cents based off of what was said so far.

 

[Aynslei]

From reading, I can see there is a bit of a divide. There are those who want only "Honorable" combat between factions, and those who want "Underhanded" methods to be available. Personally I lean towards underhanded. Not because I like to grief, but they make very fun and interesting tactics. Both to consider from an attackers perspective and a defenders. So what some here call "Abuse" some of us call "Creative Use" of the tools at your disposal.

Personalty I am all for the ability to use Gorilla tactics / Covert tactics / whatever you want to call em. Maybe we could have a config value for that?

Going off of my previous post, maybe you could have a server config value to make it so you can't place warheads on an unfactioned ship? This would allow servers to be "Hardcore PvP" vs "Honorable PvP". Players could just gravitate towards which ever they prefer. When a factioned warhead hits a ship, you get a war declaration, but on a server that allows "unfactioned warheads" you will have more sneaky attacks with them.

Just my 2 cents based off of what was said so far.

If you want to do sneaky underhanded shit log in under a different name, don't try to defend an exploit.

 

[Reilly Reese]

If you want to do sneaky underhanded shit log in under a different name, don't try to defend an exploit.

Isn't logging in as an alt just as exploity and actually harder to track?

 

[Aynslei]

Isn't logging in as an alt just as exploity and actually harder to track?

Besides the fact that its been a part of the game since for ever and some servers only let you keep one protected name I think its justified.
If servers don't want people being sneaky they might lose their name.

I used the warhead trick many times in the past, and the end of the day it was too easily abused.

 

[Sgtwisky]

Why would I bother using an alt? part of the fun is the possibility that someone could find out its me and attempt a counter attack.

Again what you call an "Exploit" I call a "Feature". Which is why I suggested a config option. Then we can both have the experience we want. For the record, much of my PvP experience in the last few years, has been with DayZ, Rust, 7Days2Die, Ark, and a few others. The PvP there is a do whatever you can to have an advantage kind of thing. In a game, just like in real life, you don't want to engage an opponent on equal/even ground. Always make sure any advantage to be had is in your favor. These are some of the basic principles in the art of war my friend. Spying, Sabotage and gorilla tactics are ALL part of a war effort.

Again a config option would let you play without worry about being at a disadvantage in "Unfair" PvP. While Myself and others could continue fighting with the gloves off and with all tactics being valid.

 

[Aynslei]

The possibility of retaliation is almost zero, I suggested using an alt so the enemy at least has a target to hunt if you feared a life long enemy.

Imo poking holes in a sleeping fish that wont ever decide to fight back is more boring than just watching two AI ships fight in single player.
Its not much of a healthy interaction considering the absentee party won't have a chance to enjoy the situation by means of revenge.

 

[Madman198237]

I think that stealthy attack capabilities are a very nice thing to have. Yes, griefing will happen, but really, people are going to do that if they want to, and very little we can do is going to stop them. Whether they go next to flinging asteroids around with collision damage on or simply using very large flying bricks as rams, I don't know, but they'll grief somehow.

Here's something I suggested in that thread that was linked earlier:
To make it possible to create proton torpedo-style limited ammunition weapons, make warheads get large grouping bonuses, giving vessels the capability of killing ships far above their weight class with limited numbers of powerful warhead-based devices.....once or twice. Because after that, you're out of ammo and vulnerable once again.

Also, increased mass on warheads would be useful to prevent mass spamming of these things. Bombers would once again necessarily be slow and ungainly, not just a fighter with a missile launcher.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

This is kind of a tough subject to discus. On one hand you have the people who like warheads and want rewards for the effort they take, I get this I want to put functional torpedoes into my carrier. On the other hand you have to consider other factors like the fact that there is no auto deceleration of war, factioned or un-factioned. This makes the issue not just about torpedoes, you also have to consider ships designed to ram. At 50 radius 500,000 damage a clocked kamikaze ship can easily do tons of damage to a large ship without the complexity and failings of torpedo systems. Kamikaze ships are relatively cheap compared to the amount of damage you can potentially inflict and can even be designed in such a way that you can hit a target multiple times without ever hurting yourself. If your lucky your attack could knock out a ships scanners making it impossible for them to fight back at all.

At this current juncture warheads have no counter, the only thing that keeps them from being in widespread use is the utterly pathetic damage.

 

[Az14el]

absentee party

Do offline players REALLY need more protection than an invulnerable homebase, extra homebase protection available from shop docking and an infinitude of empty void space to hide things in? Couple that with the long range detection offered by just afking probe fleets wherever you want & the ability to set neutral to enemy during wartime/inactivity/whenever you feel like it (I use it as state-of-emergency in a button, it works just as advertised as long as your base isn't surrounded by asteroids.)

Make warhead ramming uncloak, fine, it should because that cloaker just used a weapon, pure and simple.
Just can't agree with the cries of "griefing", this is in fact gameplay to half the active community, but these concerns are also the reason why i picked 20k/10m, because it's already useful, it's just tedious & dangerous and simply not worth it in most "honorable combat" situations at its current levels.