Missile Failure.

[GRHayes]

Land-mines, mines, cluster bombs and other types of distributed types of weapons have been killing friendlies and non combatants for a while. We also currently have no weapons system that, without any targeting, will distinguish between friend or foe with no input. What some are asking for is indiscriminately fired self propelled self guided mines that will never target a friendly.

EH WRONG
Every SAM missile launch system the US military has including shoulder fired has IFF.
CIWS has IFF. Every single US military fighter craft has IFF built into its radar system which is linked to fire control.
Every US Naval Ship has IFF in its radar system tied into fire control. I know I worked on them!
I was US Naval Nuclear ET/RO - That Electronics Tech / Reactor Operator

In general we try to keep track of troops and avoid dropping cluster bombs on them.
We also try to let our troops know where mine fields are.
We are also developing smart bombs and mine that can detect friendly ID for personnel. Even some re programmable pass code system and remote detonation so they can get rid of mines when done with them or remotely deactivate them.

In general most countries these days try to avoid killing their own troops. Very few other than a few middle eastern countries try to kill their own troops.

 

[Groovrider]

EH WRONG
Every SAM missile launch system the US military has including shoulder fired has IFF.
CIWS has IFF. Every single US military fighter craft has IFF built into its radar system which is linked to fire control.
Every US Naval Ship has IFF in its radar system tied into fire control. I know I worked on them!
I was US Naval Nuclear ET/RO - That Electronics Tech / Reactor Operator

In general we try to keep track of troops and avoid dropping cluster bombs on them.
We also try to let our troops know where mine fields are.
We are also developing smart bombs and mine that can detect friendly ID for personnel. Even some re programmable pass code system and remote detonation so they can get rid of mines when done with them or remotely deactivate them.

In general most countries these days try to avoid killing their own troops. Very few other than a few middle eastern countries try to kill their own troops.

All the weapons you mentioned get inputs from various radar devices and guidance stations. These require effort and infrastructure. M/M require nothing of the sort. The only active targeting inputs in this game are pilot locked and AI locked. Again M/M requires neither. Making it also enact IFF would be OP in the extreme.

 

[GRHayes]

All the weapons you mentioned get inputs from various radar devices and guidance stations. These require effort and infrastructure. M/M require nothing of the sort. The only active targeting inputs in this game are pilot locked and AI locked. Again M/M requires neither. Making it also enact IFF would be OP in the extreme.

Shoulder fired SAM gets its own input because it has its own transponder receiver system.

I guess you forgot what is in the top right corner of your screen. Isn't there a radar that displays more than a single colored dot. After all it does distinguish between friend and foe so IFF is clearly built into the ship.
Do you want to throw out another lame excuse?

 

[Groovrider]

Shoulder fired SAM gets its own input because it has its own transponder receiver system.

I guess you forgot what is in the top right corner of your screen. Isn't there a radar that displays more than a single colored dot. After all it does distinguish between friend and foe so IFF is clearly built into the ship.
Do you want to throw out another lame excuse?

But that requires nothing of the player. It's automatic. All I need is a core and some missile blocks. These aren't lame excuses but a reaction to the lack of any good suggestion on how to not make it OP that cannot be duplicated by simply using turrets. Get as belligerent as you like. It does not trouble me.

edit: I believe a shoulder launched SAM at least has to be pointed at the target? M/M doesn't need that either.

 

[MacThule]

Land-mines, mines, cluster bombs and other types of distributed types of weapons have been killing friendlies and non combatants for a while. We also currently have no weapons system that, without any targeting, will distinguish between friend or foe with no input. What some are asking for is indiscriminately fired self propelled self guided mines that will never target a friendly.

These are good observations. Truth.

 

[GRHayes]

But that requires nothing of the player. It's automatic. All I need is a core and some missile blocks. These aren't lame excuses but a reaction to the lack of any good suggestion on how to not make it OP that cannot be duplicated by simply using turrets. Get as belligerent as you like. It does not trouble me.

edit: I believe a shoulder launched SAM at least has to be pointed at the target? M/M doesn't need that either.

First, we don't build every single last thing in this game. The number of parts we use to build stuff doesn't even make for a small fraction that goes into any one of these systems in RL. Last I checked we didn't need to run wiring to hook the fire control up to the core. So why would we need to connect up the IFF which is clearly built into the radar system.

You have an opinion you think it would make it more OP. That is an opinion and you probably haven't read through all the suggestions or comments in regards to every solution. Lets say you have fine great doesn't matter. You are entitled to your opinion regardless what it is.

What gets me is you went to the point of making a false statement like "We also currently have no weapons system that, without any targeting, will distinguish between friend or foe with no input. " It simply isn't true more than a few systems we have today have built in systems. It is part of technology getting smaller and better.
Then you try and continue the crap, "All the weapons you mentioned get inputs from various radar devices and guidance stations. " FIM-92 have built in IFF yes they can be over ridden but it is still there. I can go through a list of others. You seemed to have forgotten like I pointed out about the radar system that is there clear as day with IFF.

Let me give you a hint about what we actually can do in an air craft these days. We have missiles a fighter can fire today at a target aircraft from over the horizon and out side of radar range and the missile will travel till it gets to the approximate area and can find and hit the specific target they want.

There are so many ways to limit weapons in game having them shoot your own ships is the stupidest by far to use. They already showed they can use time, reduced power and damage, and speed. They haven't used ammo, mass, storage space, cost, cluster/swarm destruction - chain reaction of missiles destroying themselves, chaff, flares, jammers, heat dampners and dispersion systems , em pulse, ...
All it takes is a little imagination or knowing some of what is used in RL.

 

[Groovrider]

First, we don't build every single last thing in this game. The number of parts we use to build stuff doesn't even make for a small fraction that goes into any one of these systems in RL. Last I checked we didn't need to run wiring to hook the fire control up to the core. So why would we need to connect up the IFF which is clearly built into the radar system.

You have an opinion you think it would make it more OP. That is an opinion and you probably haven't read through all the suggestions or comments in regards to every solution. Lets say you have fine great doesn't matter. You are entitled to your opinion regardless what it is.

What gets me is you went to the point of making a false statement like "We also currently have no weapons system that, without any targeting, will distinguish between friend or foe with no input. " It simply isn't true more than a few systems we have today have built in systems. It is part of technology getting smaller and better.
Then you try and continue the crap, "All the weapons you mentioned get inputs from various radar devices and guidance stations. " FIM-92 have built in IFF yes they can be over ridden but it is still there. I can go through a list of others. You seemed to have forgotten like I pointed out about the radar system that is there clear as day with IFF.

Let me give you a hint about what we actually can do in an air craft these days. We have missiles a fighter can fire today at a target aircraft from over the horizon and out side of radar range and the missile will travel till it gets to the approximate area and can find and hit the specific target they want.

There are so many ways to limit weapons in game having them shoot your own ships is the stupidest by far to use. They already showed they can use time, reduced power and damage, and speed. They haven't used ammo, mass, storage space, cost, cluster/swarm destruction - chain reaction of missiles destroying themselves, chaff, flares, jammers, heat dampners and dispersion systems , em pulse, ...
All it takes is a little imagination or knowing some of what is used in RL.

A few points.

Even if the guidance is built in, someone had to build it. Someone had to put "kill this" and "don't kill that" in a list somewhere. Humans are in the loop. Not so with M/M.

As for your assertions about my reading ability...

The ammo system is probably the best way to balance this type of thing but this thread isn't about an ammo system. The effort to create such an elaborate and robust system is total overkill in order fix one feature of one weapon. Especially since, for the moment at least, the devs and most players don't want one for the game as a whole.

 

[GRHayes]

A few points.

Even if the guidance is built in, someone had to build it. Someone had to put "kill this" and "don't kill that" in a list somewhere. Humans are in the loop. Not so with M/M.

As for your assertions about my reading ability...

The ammo system is probably the best way to balance this type of thing but this thread isn't about an ammo system. The effort to create such an elaborate and robust system is total overkill in order fix one feature of one weapon. Especially since, for the moment at least, the devs and most players don't want one for the game as a whole.

I didn't say anything about your reading ability. The comment was that there are thousands of suggestions and even more comments on them.
Sorry, I hadn't seen the pole taken of the devs and players. I assume their must be one since you are talking like you asked all of them or even so reasonable fraction of them. If not this is the exact type of horse crap I hate I mentioned before.

 

[Groovrider]

I didn't say anything about your reading ability. The comment was that there are thousands of suggestions and even more comments on them.
Sorry, I hadn't seen the pole taken of the devs and players. I assume their must be one since you are talking like you asked all of them or even so reasonable fraction of them. If not this is the exact type of horse crap I hate I mentioned before.

Keep your crap and your hate. I don't need them.

There are many polls on ammo system. Oddly most seem in favor. I personally would be in favor but there is still some real resistance to changes so fundamental. There is a recognized brainstorm thread but it hasn't been active lately and it's not on the development time line and the devs seem to be on the fence about effort vs reward. If it pops up, great but it won't be just to fix this.

edit: And none of this changes my opinion that if you want guided weapons that won't kill your mates you either aim it or stick a bobby AI on it.

 

[Pacific_Jim]

I'd honestly completely rework how they function. Instead of having them choose their own target make the player aim them, there's still the niche of being able to missile spam with less power investment to override AMS.

 

[Livaria]

So just to be clear for all of us involved; the concern comes from the missiles ability to instantly track an enemy as opposed to other missiles which take time to lock-on. Is this correct Groovrider?

 

[Gonzalo]

That's stupid. I have difficulty even imagining why multiple people think that heat seeking missiles that destroy allies is acceptable. The military wouldn't even use that technology if that were the case.

It's an objectively flawed weapon in Starmade and somehow there are people willing to defend it.

true, but that's why you got lock ons

in my opinion they should go for the nearest entity aka heat signature. if they ignored friendlies swarmers would be so much superior to lock ons.

 

[Livaria]

So it's all about lock-ons right now. Let me ask you this:

1) Is lock-on time a good or even a reliable balancing tool?

2) In combat; Is it really necessary for players to wait a few seconds just to be able to fire a missile?

3) What purpose does a lock-on time serve to enhance a players combat experience?

Answer one or all of these questions. If no one has an answer, then it's a reasonable assumption that a lock-on times are an unnecessary feature. If we remove lock-ons then we can take the *lock-on superiority* of swarm missiles out of the question.

 

[Madman198237]

We need a complete scanning/jamming/cloaking/detection rewrite, in my opinion. Weapon locks are tied into this. If you can see it, you can shoot it. Instant locks. M-M only useful when you have targets locked. If you can't, then use a lockon missile. Takes some time to lock a jammed target, but you can then fire a missile or 100 at them.

 

[Livaria]

I'm working on a suggestion topic that will cover a lot of topics regarding combat. Lock-on times may be one of them.

 

[Groovrider]

So just to be clear for all of us involved; the concern comes from the missiles ability to instantly track an enemy as opposed to other missiles which take time to lock-on. Is this correct Groovrider?

Well yeah kind of pretty much. In my own opinion anyway.
[doublepost=1471305342,1471304975][/doublepost]

I'm working on a suggestion topic that will cover a lot of topics regarding combat. Lock-on times may be one of them.

Now see if you want to talk about multi-lock-on, that would be a different beast: Not so long ago I played an archer in Tera. One skill required you to hold down fire, pass your reticle over every target wanted hit (up to 5 or something), and then release. Every selected target would then get a guided arrow bomb to the face. Being able to select a group of targets would be awesome and tactically useful. IMO.
[doublepost=1471305979][/doublepost]

So it's all about lock-ons right now. Let me ask you this:

1) Is lock-on time a good or even a reliable balancing tool? In my experience against player piloted ships lock on time and target discrimination distance can make piloting skill and the maneuvering capabilities of the ship decisive as it encouraged innovation in movement and ship design. IMO.

2) In combat; Is it really necessary for players to wait a few seconds just to be able to fire a missile? Yes because this can give your target a chance to evade you (if their ship is capable) or deploy countermeasures (like killing you first with cannons). IMO.

3) What purpose does a lock-on time serve to enhance a players combat experience? You don't have to use lock on times at all. Just set a bunch of missile turrets to fire at selected and pick it from a list.

Answer one or all of these questions. If no one has an answer, then it's a reasonable assumption that a lock-on times are an unnecessary feature. If we remove lock-ons then we can take the *lock-on superiority* of swarm missiles out of the question.

 

[Gasboy]

That's stupid. I have difficulty even imagining why multiple people think that heat seeking missiles that destroy allies is acceptable. The military wouldn't even use that technology if that were the case.

It's an objectively flawed weapon in Starmade and somehow there are people willing to defend it.

Since several militaries have shot down jet airliners full of people, your statement has been proven wrong. Friendlies can be targeted and fired upon by military weapons.

That is why militaries train their soldiers and personnel so that such things are incredibly rare occurrences.

Now that you know what missile-missile does, you'll switch to a different weapon, or you'll only use that weapon when the only targets it can hit are enemies.

 

[Gasboy]

EH WRONG
Every SAM missile launch system the US military has including shoulder fired has IFF.
CIWS has IFF. Every single US military fighter craft has IFF built into its radar system which is linked to fire control.
Every US Naval Ship has IFF in its radar system tied into fire control. I know I worked on them!
I was US Naval Nuclear ET/RO - That Electronics Tech / Reactor Operator

In general we try to keep track of troops and avoid dropping cluster bombs on them.
We also try to let our troops know where mine fields are.
We are also developing smart bombs and mine that can detect friendly ID for personnel. Even some re programmable pass code system and remote detonation so they can get rid of mines when done with them or remotely deactivate them.

In general most countries these days try to avoid killing their own troops. Very few other than a few middle eastern countries try to kill their own troops.

Civilian airliners have IFF boxes that identify them as civilian airliners.

Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So explain how that happened?

The Soviet Union also shot down at least one airliner as well.

And you can also consider the airliner lost over the Ukraine about a year or so ago.

Pretty sure that most nations' militaries have weapons that recognize the various identification boxes that aircraft use. And can be made to fire upon them, even if they are pinging as friendlies. Pilots can also turn OFF such boxes.

Using radar/infrared guided missiles requires training and practice, to avoid mistakes that costs people their lives. But mistakes can still be made. So can intentional attacks.

 

[GRHayes]

Civilian airliners have IFF boxes that identify them as civilian airliners.

Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So explain how that happened?

The Soviet Union also shot down at least one airliner as well.

And you can also consider the airliner lost over the Ukraine about a year or so ago.

Pretty sure that most nations' militaries have weapons that recognize the various identification boxes that aircraft use. And can be made to fire upon them, even if they are pinging as friendlies. Pilots can also turn OFF such boxes.

Using radar/infrared guided missiles requires training and practice, to avoid mistakes that costs people their lives. But mistakes can still be made. So can intentional attacks.

Because you can override IFF. Which I already mentioned.

In short your missile system can have IFF on it and you can override it and still fire. The military especially has such ability because there is always a potential an enemy gets hold of an IFF transponder system be it by stealing a military air craft or any other means. In short you still want to be able to shoot people down who are pretending to be friendly.

Just to make it clear accidental or intentional shootings like you are talking about isn't the same as we are talking about in here. This is a situation where a system has been designed to shoot friendlies for NO reason what-so-ever other than to act as a penalty. It would be like the US army going out and saying our men are doing to good in the combat arena we need to penalize them find 20 of them line them up and shoot them.

 

[Gasboy]

Because you can override IFF. Which I already mentioned.

In short your missile system can have IFF on it and you can override it and still fire. The military especially has such ability because there is always a potential an enemy gets hold of an IFF transponder system be it by stealing a military air craft or any other means. In short you still want to be able to shoot people down who are pretending to be friendly.

Just to make it clear accidental or intentional shootings like you are talking about isn't the same as we are talking about in here. This is a situation where a system has been designed to shoot friendlies for NO reason what-so-ever other than to act as a penalty. It would be like the US army going out and saying our men are doing to good in the combat arena we need to penalize them find 20 of them line them up and shoot them.

No, the missile-missile system is designed to spew out many, many missiles. It's designed so that people can engage a large number of opponents at once. The downside is that it makes no distinction between friend or foe. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER WEAPON. With the exception of lock-missiles, which are balanced a different way for being able to specifically target something and forget about it.

Sure, they could have coded a different downside to missile-missile systems. But it would leave them relatively overpowered simply because you could fire indiscriminately waves and waves of missiles with ease.

Don't like it? Don't use it. If you do use it, you have to be wary of how you engage targets.