AMCs - Idea for Calculation and Mechanic Rework

    Joined
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages
    38
    Reaction score
    0
    At the moment it is all based on pure number of blocks.
    In here it was discussed about reduced reload time for bigger cannons
    http://star-made.org/content/amc-damage-rework-fix-shield-and-hull-problem

    so, what about this:
    "distance" and "speed" should be combined.
    instead of "distance" i would want to see "radius" (not as high as rockets, maybe just 10% of what a rocket has)

    Longer Barrel = Higher Speed/Distance, decreased radius in Height and Width -> Long Range Sniper Cannon
    Thicker Barrel = Higher Radius in all directions, but decreased speed -> Short Range explosive cannon
    also: more guns = less reload, more damage, added to the other modifiers above

    so, 1 block long very thick cannon would move very slowly over a short distance to deal high damage to the area, maybe it could hit shields multiple times because of the increased radius.
    a 1 thick very long cannon would move with incredible speed over long range but would deal damage to only one block
    a very thick and very long cannon would have a combined effect, very high damage from increased block-count in length and width, speed would negate, and radius would only be high in length, so basically a weapon with incredible long reload time, but very high damage to multiple blocks in a row




    the calculation could work in "layers (length) and rows", a three dimensional calculation to give us more design choices. for each layer it will reduce the thickness by 1 and increase the length by 1, because there is always one block that does not count for thickness. For an easier examply i set it as "Center" but in fact it doesnt matter where you put it in, just once per layer (there is only one thing where i dont know how to handle it, see at the end)

    lets try this on an example:
    a 3x3 pattern with one extra block in the center (frontview)
    ***
    *x*
    ***
    R = Row, L = Layer
    1R, 1L -> 3 blocks -> 3 Thickness
    2R, 1L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 1L - 3 Blocks -> 3 Thickness
    1R, 2L -> 3 blocks -> 3 Thickness
    2R, 2L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 2L - 3 Blocks -> 3 Thickness
    1R, 3L -> 3 blocks -> 3 Thickness
    2R, 3L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 3L - 3 Blocks -> 3 Thickness
    1R, 4L -> 0 blocks -> 0 Thickness
    2R, 4L, Center -> 1 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 0 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 4L - 0 Blocks -> 0 Thickness
    result: 24 Thickness, 4 Lenght

    for a Long-Cross-Cannon it would look like this
    again a 3x3 pattern with one extra block in the center, but this time without the corners (frontview)
    *
    *x*
    *

    1R, 1L -> 1 blocks -> 1 Thickness
    2R, 1L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 1L - 1 Blocks -> 1 Thickness
    1R, 2L -> 1 blocks -> 1 Thickness
    2R, 2L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 2L - 1 Blocks -> 1 Thickness
    1R, 3L -> 1 blocks -> 1 Thickness
    2R, 3L, Center -> 3 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 2 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 3L - 3 Blocks -> 1 Thickness
    1R, 4L -> 0 blocks -> 0 Thickness
    2R, 4L, Center -> 1 Blocks -1 Block from Center = 0 Thickness, 1 Length
    3R, 4L -> 0 blocks -> 0 Thickness
    result: 12 Thickness, 4 Length
    Hope you understand what i mean

    the only problem i would see would be a setup that "splits", like this (sideview):
    /----
    ---x
    \----
    I would still reduce the thickness by 1 and increase the length by 1 for each layer
     
    Joined
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages
    119
    Reaction score
    4
    I think that if you have 2 blocks that are parallel on the output, damage should be almost double and the fire rate halved (along with less efficient power draw), then the cannon shot should deal half of it\'s damage to two blocks. Then continue this pattern for adding additional output face blocks on a cannon. This way, players can trade DPS (which should be lowered considerably) in order to have more efficient hull destruction.

    Other than that (and inverting the firing curve for adding more AMC blocks), I think AMC cannons work pretty well right now. So the largest guns would be terribly slow-firing behemoths, but would literally vaporize entire sections of hull when it hit. (kinda related: I also think Hardened Hull should share a large portion of incoming damage with all connected Reinforced Hull, so it\'ll become hard to just pepper spray a hull with single shots like you do now, as it would take an effective 4,000 damage to one-shot a Reinforced Hull, assuming 90% of damage is shared. Of corse, this would mean all connected Reinforced Hull blocks would recieve a combined 3,600 between them.)
     
    Joined
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages
    38
    Reaction score
    0
    the damage would still be increased by the amount of blocks, while the RoF would be reduced.
    it would also affect the split barrel, there would be no difference.

    Compared to rockets, who are usually either slow with incredible damage or fast with tracking abilitys, the AMCs are very very strong, a 60k d1000 rocket array cant beat my 120x100 AMC.
    my AMC has damage per burst (253 each, so 30368). They are placed in a circle like shape.
    my 60k d1000 had something around 750 damage with a radius of 50.
    so, my AMC had a higher range, higher damage, higher radius, higher rof...with 1/6 of what the rockets arrays had...feels wrong