Recognized Diminishing returns design

    Joined
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages
    1,714
    Reaction score
    650
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 3
    • Councillor Gold
    Finally, AI accuracy versus player accuracy is already something we consider and try to keep at a viable ratio, humans SHOULD be better than the AI, however, this is only in regards to aiming, and is only for gameplay purposes. As for rate of fire, I'm not convinced that a player should have a better rate than an AI.
    I can appreciate this but it makes certain features practically useless. See: Point Defense. Since the turrets can't lead the target worth a damn they become next to useless with intercepting missiles unless used in massive amounts.
     
    Joined
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages
    77
    Reaction score
    16
    It's an incentive to adding a horizontal scaling factor for mega ships. If their turrets require crew to be 100% instead of say - 80%, bam. You've just opened up a whole new avenue of gameplay

    1) players will recruit players to crew items
    2) there's now a way to get into the game for people who aren't into building.

    shit that gives me another idea.
     
    Joined
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages
    772
    Reaction score
    452
    Comr4de, this is why, as I said, it is something we are continuing to try to keep balanced. The missile defense system is newer than the last accuracy modification the AI had.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: CyberTao
    Joined
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages
    1,714
    Reaction score
    650
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen 3
    • Councillor Gold
    Comr4de, this is why, as I said, it is something we are continuing to try to keep balanced. The missile defense system is newer than the last accuracy modification the AI had.
    I see, thanks
     
    Joined
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages
    77
    Reaction score
    16
    I get that. I guess my other problem with the current system is that damage scales linearly with block investment - but effect and effectiveness is not linear and there are no downsides.

    I would urge you to consider creating some downsides to bigger weapons, to steer the game away from 'swarm missile with 1000 blocks' (or missile/beam, or missile/pulse)

    Just think outside the box with me on this and consider it.

    In terms of total effectiveness, having much bigger single weapons is a huge tactical advantage as it decisively allows for greater effect and allwos the player to command that firepower directly. Forcing them to split up weapons into turrets reduces the linear (and in some cases even better than linear) gain from superpowered weapons.

    Some obvious ideas that come to mind are :

    Bigger missiles have a slower acceleration and turn radius. Yes, you can make a 1000 block swarm missile but they are only going to hit a station.
    Bigger gun/beam systems have longer recharge times. This way you gain damage per hit, lose dps. Instead of a straight bonus, it's a trade off, but retains some tactical advantage.

    These are just the obvious ones - my point is that if you think about the -goal- behind the design of limiting single weapons in power and the horizontal diversity of gameplay that can provide, the answers come easily.
     
    Joined
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages
    772
    Reaction score
    452
    Missiles already have updates to their flight behavior planned, i mentioned that in one of these posts with you :p as for other weapon behavior, I do consider other options, for example, like i mentioned, power usage can easily be capped further to discourage further weapon size increases, the same could be said for power usage of the weapons. The thing is right now, defensive systems aren't even entirely implemented, IF we were to consider diminishing returns on larger weapons, it would not be until after those future systems are completed and various balancing options are considered.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: aceface and Criss

    Criss

    Social Media Director
    Joined
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages
    2,187
    Reaction score
    1,772
    • Master Builder Bronze
    • Video Genius
    • Competition Winner - Stations
    Everything calbirk is saying is making me very happy. For a while I was concerned they wouldnt see the possible issues with overpowered weapons. Glad its already under discussion.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: aceface
    Joined
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages
    77
    Reaction score
    16
    Missiles already have updates to their flight behavior planned, i mentioned that in one of these posts with you :p as for other weapon behavior, I do consider other options, for example, like i mentioned, power usage can easily be capped further to discourage further weapon size increases, the same could be said for power usage of the weapons. The thing is right now, defensive systems aren't even entirely implemented, IF we were to consider diminishing returns on larger weapons, it would not be until after those future systems are completed and various balancing options are considered.
    Did I miss a post? Sorry I've been in a brain fever today going all crazy designing stuff and posting. Not enough coffee, I think.

    Your post gave me an idea though - one way to create a tertiary effect to larger weapons that would make them a lot less useful against smaller ships would be to make them less accurate. Against a bigger ship, this is not so much of an issue but against a smaller one, it could be critical and frustrating - like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer.

    You could also create a system whereby the actual firing reticle for larger weapons moves slower on the screen for fixed weapons - like trails the actual cursor, which would mimic gimbals moving slower.

    Shit you could limit the range of motion for weapons as they get bigger too.

    EDIT:

    The more I think about it, just changing the behaviour of the firing reticle for larger weapons combined with mass on missiles solves a great part of the problem. That introduces a situational downside to larger weapons without making them mathematically less effective.

    If it became difficult to hit smaller agile ships with big weapons, that would create a situation where the smaller ships gained an agility advantage which could be exploited by the right pilot. Defeating a quantitative advantage with a qualitative one through skill is some very gratifying emergent gameplay.
     
    Joined
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages
    1,831
    Reaction score
    374
    • Legacy Citizen 2
    • Top Forum Contributor
    • Legacy Citizen
    This same logic can be applied to the HP of the ship (either way this would be preferable to the achilles heel that is the ship core currently). The HP system we are planning would have % stages in its HP where various affects could be applied to your ship as damage occurs, regardless of the integrity of individual system blocks (all your shield blocks might remain, but at a certain % of ship HP, shields may be set to fail entirely.
    I was hoping that these events would instead be tied to the values of those stats rather than arbirary HP. For example, when your thrust drops below 25% of the inital value, you lose all thrust. When your shield capacity drops below 10% of its inital value, your shields won't regenerate.
     
    Joined
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages
    2,827
    Reaction score
    1,181
    • Video Genius
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Top Forum Contributor
    i like the idea of power slowly becomming less effective like you said calbiri