1. We've removed some functionality from SMD in preparation for a migration to new forum software. We expect to make the move before the end of August.

    PLEASE Rework Missile Capacity

    Discussion in 'Suggestions' started by JNC, Jan 13, 2019.

    Tags:
    1. JNC

      JNC

      Joined:
      Nov 11, 2013
      Messages:
      142
      "To prevent missile spam, a ship will now have a shipwide missile capacity. This capacity reloads overtime at a fixed rate, and requires some additional power to do so. You can place extra missile capacity blocks on your entity to increase the base capacity. This means that there is a finite number of missiles you can use in a battle. To counteract that restriction, missiles will be made stronger and less will be more. Firing a missile should be a real decision rather than a no-brainer.
      This not only will help with performance during battle, but also will make missiles feel a lot more impactful.
      "

      Is preventing spamming so essential as to limit ships to 4 missiles? I say 4 because i can use 1 capacity block to get that, but need nearly 500 capacity blocks to get a total of 6 missiles? Is this working as intended?? If you really want missiles to be meaningful, why not stop reloading in combat all together so they actually are finite and not just reloaded every 5 seconds?

      How about this:
      - Missile tubes without capacity blocks will hold 1 shot (1 pull of the trigger, not actual missiles) and reload 1 shot only after entity (or host entity) has not fired anything or been hit by anything... maybe 30sec wait and 30sec reload?

      - Tubes with capacity blocks require 1:1 ratio to reload 1 shot and will do so regardless of combat. If a launcher is 3 blocks, then it's safe to say the missile is probably 3 blocks and therefor a capacity block would also need to be 3 blocks to store that projectile, not 30 or whatever crazy ratio it is right now. Reloading requires power, so reload time should either be adjustable or based on the launcher, not the number of capacity blocks because having lots of volatile ammo shouldn't be the key to a high fire rate.

      At the very least, the capacity block/launcher block ratio needs to be tweaked, a lot, and reload rate should be expanded..... base 5 seconds isn't spamming?
       
      • Like Like x 1
    2. MilitantCollective

      MilitantCollective Ares Initiative Dev

      Joined:
      Dec 12, 2016
      Messages:
      38
      All weapons need to use actual ammo in storage. Otherwise there is no strategem to warfare. The arcade warfare is the biggest turn off to most players who leave for games like Empyrion and Space Engineers, both of which require the production of ammo and essentials to survive... even fuel
       
      • Like Like x 4
    3. JinM

      Joined:
      Jun 11, 2016
      Messages:
      1,129
      I think even more finetune options in regards to capacity, including beams and cannons, would be nice. So server owners can make advanced interesting configs.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    4. Lone_Puppy

      Lone_Puppy Me, myself and I.

      Joined:
      Mar 12, 2015
      Messages:
      1,246
      I would prefer Missile launchers use storage blocks to store whatever finite missiles are allowed. They deplete as you fire, thus emptying out the storage. Once the storage is empty, the launcher would naturally stop.

      This would also limit block spam in ships.
       
      • Like Like x 2
    5. NeonSturm

      NeonSturm StormMaker

      Joined:
      Dec 31, 2013
      Messages:
      5,111
      Forget my previous answer (deleted for would-be-cluttering this thread up).

      I have found a better alternative (grown while being off-thread):
      Intro:
      You build your own missile for real.
      For that, it requires a missile block and warheads, static weapons.
      You can even dock barrels (no turret base - only barrel as missile regularily gets aim during 360° rotation around Z-axis)

      This missile rail consists of 4 parts.
      One pickup point - just use the one we got.
      One pickup rail - just use the one we got.
      One missile storage rail - it will make everything move until it hits the last block or another docked entity and then it stops.
      One shootout rail - it's function will be modified by the storage-rail it touches.

      Make initial reboot to activate stored missiles.
      The game checks if they can -in order- leave through that shootout rail until they exit your ship's boundary box.
      After that missiles are available for shooting!

      You will shoot missiles and refill them by rebooting your ship.
      • They wont be depleted for real, but turn into a red hologram marking them as "currently missing".
      • Your weapon computer connected to the missile storage rail displays reload like normal.

      Edit:Note:
      You may add multiple missile storage rails to the same shootout. In that case, you may choose which to fire, but shootout will only work once every second for these missiles and only if no other entity is using it.
      1. A missile only stores 10 seconds of reactor power or firing power - or even less.
      2. All blocks on the same Z-value counts as segment.
      3. If the missile takes certain damage, one segment is removed.
      4. All warhead or weapon damage from one segment is reduced from the next for the "compiled version of the missile" every reboot.
      5. Weapons ranges on missiles are reduced to 1/2 or less, probably to 1/4 or less.
      6. Not all blocks are compatible on missiles.
        But generic Armor HP and DPS should be used.
      7. Thrust does not cost energy. But you have a time-to-life.
      Disclaimer: Eventually, we will only ever use hull blocks and warheads for missiles and balance stats otherwise. If needed, missile blocks can be used for that. Missile blocks on a missle - makes sense or not?​
       
      #5 NeonSturm, Jan 13, 2019
      Last edited: Jan 13, 2019
    6. jayman38

      jayman38 Precentor-Primus, pro-tempore

      Joined:
      Jul 13, 2014
      Messages:
      2,511
      Is Weapon Capacity and combat recharge available in the ruleset for the new server rule system? If not, they should be. I think this would be a great decision for server owners.
       
      • Like Like x 2
    7. StormWing0

      StormWing0 Leads the Storm

      Joined:
      Jun 26, 2015
      Messages:
      2,117
      Honestly ammo could be done easier by using cargo space linked to the computer or a storage for that matter and make raw ammo or any ammo using weapon in a factory. Energy based weapons would draw power exclusively and not use ammo while Matter based weapons would use ammo. Since we're talking storages and cargo spaces here there'll be a limited amount of ammo that unless gets refilled by a factory making the ammo well run out sooner or later. The ammo itself could be customizable like like ships and stations are. :)
       
      • Like Like x 4
    8. klawxx

      klawxx Product Manager - Roden Shipyards

      Joined:
      Jan 5, 2016
      Messages:
      250
      Thats an awesome Idea... Could also lead to alternative ammo instead of Heat/Kinetic/EMP computers!
       
      • Like Like x 1
    9. FatCobra

      Joined:
      Jun 24, 2015
      Messages:
      247
      Ok I like this idea. Effect computers have never made sense to me, different ammunition makes much more sense.
       
      • Like Like x 3
    10. DeepspaceMechanic

      Joined:
      Mar 10, 2016
      Messages:
      414
      So far, I personally had only minimal interest in StarMade weapon systems, but the missile system feels so irritatingly inelegant that you can't help but complain about it. (Consider my OCD triggered, I guess.)


      First, you have an actual missile weapon, consisting of computer and module group(s). Trigger the computer once, and it will launch as many missiles as many module groups you have, with the strength of an individual missile depending on the size of the module group it came from. Then, for some time, the computer can't send another launch signal to the actual weapon, due to "launcher cooldown and/or missile reload". Cooldown/reload time also depends on the abilities of the type of missile launched (if you're using more effective ones, you can use them less frequently). So far so good, IT ALL MAKES PERFECT SENSE. (y)

      Then comes the missile capacity system. Capacity blocks are supposedly missile storage units, making the weapon module groups themselves only launching mechanisms (while previously we would assume that they also stored their ammo, which never depleted simply because they could store more than you could use up in a battle). So again, capacity blocks = storage, weapon module groups = launchers.

      This should mean that (1) you still get as many missiles launched per launch signal as many module groups you have, if the computer indicates that reload has finished, and that (2) within capacity blocks, you can carry a finite amount of missiles, which you can deplete in battle, and refill at bases/shops.


      Instead, we have both the computer indicating some process which has to end before you can launch again, and the capacity system CAN AND HAS TO RELOAD ITSELF TOO? - What?!

      Ok, wait... To be fair, we could say the computer indicates the cooldown of the launchers, while the refill timer of the capacity system indicates the reloading of the launchers with ammo. And the refill time depends on the total number of missiles you can have prepared at once, because moving more stuff into place requires more time.

      BUT STILL:
      • the total number of missiles you can have prepared at once relates to the number of capacity blocks, and not linearly;
      • it doesn't relate to the total number of outputs on the ship;
      • you can have the launchers and the storage at different ends of a ship, with tons of stuff and no pathway in between (which is absurd);
      • and you always have to pay attention to both computer cooldown and capacity refill (which is annoying, and also confusing before you make up some realistic interpretation of it all, like this one).

      So yeah. It's a very inelegant system. Sure could use some improvement.
       
      #10 DeepspaceMechanic, Jan 17, 2019
      Last edited: Jan 17, 2019
      • Like Like x 3
    11. klawxx

      klawxx Product Manager - Roden Shipyards

      Joined:
      Jan 5, 2016
      Messages:
      250
      It sounds like capacity blocks where just a placeholder for something that should have been done on the Weapons 3.0 but for a time constrain have been left behind... Thinking about it, a lot of the new weapon mechanics sound like this... Plus I miss the Shotgun effect and some of the new combinations are Irrelevant.
      --- Updated post (merge), Jan 17, 2019, Original Post Date: Jan 17, 2019 ---
      Before I forgot... Missile Capacity are broken to me. It seems after some of these rule changes.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    12. NeonSturm

      NeonSturm StormMaker

      Joined:
      Dec 31, 2013
      Messages:
      5,111
      I see it this way:

      ° Cannons are nice weapons, but the considerable recoil may disallow firing at a ship you chase. Makes escaping easier.
      ° Beams are the weapons of choice if you need to distribute limited firepower equally on all sides of your ship.
      Bigger guns, same reactor - firepower exactly where needed.
      ° Missiles are always a loss. Consider using other weapons if you are not overwelmed, but use these as tools of survival or archiving some mission with high rewards if you must. The real problem is "getting the missiles without being tracked".

      But for optics, there can be sub-variants that can make one look like the other.
      Drones which carry lasers/cannons can look a bit like missiles.
      Maser cannons (matter-streamers similar to lasers) can use ammo and look like beams.
      Plasma-cannons can use primarily power.

      Actually: Choose a look + give some explanation why it uses ammo or (infinite, but lower yield) energy or looks like a missile and you get it.
      Just one internal mechanism must be selected for balance.
       
    13. Dr. Whammy

      Dr. Whammy Executive Constructologist of the United Star Axis

      Joined:
      Jul 22, 2014
      Messages:
      1,532
      If this is how they chose to reduce spam, then MISSION FAILED.
      If you want to stop spam, you need to fix missiles themselves; not just build filler blocks to compensate for a flawed system.

      The problem with missiles boils down to the following:
      1) missile speed is decreased if you use the M/B combo; leading to missiles that are easier for AMS to hit.
      - result: people spam to overwhelm AMS. ...which in turn leads to more AMS spam.

      2) the inertia-driven "bomb" is basically pointless against anything mobile. ...but is negated by HB protection.
      - result: a rarely used filler weapon likened to "damage pulse" with regard to actual combat effectiveness.

      3) Unless your target is large and slow, guided missiles miss their target 99% of the time; having to swing around 4-5 times to score a hit.
      - result: people spam to increase the probability of a hit.

      4) No matter how large or powerful you make the missile, you will quickly reach a damage cap due to limited blast radius AND the spherical explosion mechanic which wastes half of your damage on the vacuum of space. In short; there is no real advantage to making a 20M damage nuke anymore.
      - result: people spam smaller missiles to increase overall damage.


      The fix:
      - Scale blast radius with base damage linearly to eliminate the damage cap on missiles.
      - The "Bomb" should be a slow moving unguided rocket. ...or allow launch while cloaked.
      - Fix missile tracking ability so they don't miss all the damn time.
       
      • Like Like x 3
    14. Edymnion

      Edymnion Carebear Extraordinaire!

      Joined:
      Mar 18, 2015
      Messages:
      2,706
      Technically we can already do that ourselves. Missile hit rate is based on AI difficulty. Only problem is if you crank it up so that missiles hit reliably, then you've just made every pirate in the galaxy a crack marksman who never misses as well.

      Found that out the hard way on a server that had the AI difficulty turned down so low even lock on missiles never hit anything. They just circled endlessly.
       
      • Like Like x 3
    15. JinM

      Joined:
      Jun 11, 2016
      Messages:
      1,129
      Missiles need a different AI in the first place, or take their AI behaviour from a different config. Damn elusive to me why different ships or NPC factions, even different sectors or single turrets on a ship, can't have different AI settings in the first place.
       
    16. Edymnion

      Edymnion Carebear Extraordinaire!

      Joined:
      Mar 18, 2015
      Messages:
      2,706
      Oh I agree, and I'd wager they're working on exactly that.

      We've just been stuck with placeholder AI this whole time. It only ever had to be good enough to test everything else with. I'm sure we'll get many levels of AI for different things once all the "different things" are in place and nailed down.

      Its just not worth the dev time to write a "good" AI for something you know you're revamping in the next year or two, but now that we're getting the final universe update and words like "beta" are getting thrown around by the team, the time is right.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    17. JinM

      Joined:
      Jun 11, 2016
      Messages:
      1,129
      They should not write a new AI if they have no time for nothing, just make the configs for each entity/sector/weapon individualisable.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    18. klawxx

      klawxx Product Manager - Roden Shipyards

      Joined:
      Jan 5, 2016
      Messages:
      250
      I sincere hope that anything they come up with this so called universe update is final and wont be released upside down in a new "Universe Update 2.0"... for God sake.
       
      • Like Like x 1
    19. Dr. Whammy

      Dr. Whammy Executive Constructologist of the United Star Axis

      Joined:
      Jul 22, 2014
      Messages:
      1,532
      Another thing about bombs...

      If I have to wait 3 seconds for the the bomb to "arm", then WHY is the range so damn low for a 1:1 M/M Bomb?
       
      • Like Like x 1
    20. NTIMESc

      Joined:
      May 18, 2015
      Messages:
      277
      The current system functions by increasing missile capacity relatively quickly reaching 200 missiles at 10,000 capacity blocks. 200 missiles is a soft cap, as, after 10,000 MC modules, the amount of capacity gained drops off very quickly, (adding another 10,000 modules will only get you about 33 more missiles). The result is that small ships will never be able to have more that a handful of missiles, and any ship large enough to make adding 10,000 extra blocks trivial will will have 200 missiles. The system does prevent spamming, in the sense that no reasonably functional ship will ever be able to fire off more than 200 missiles at once. So, yes, it is working as intended to both reduce the number of missiles that a ship can fire simultaneously and to discourage the wanton firing missiles on a whim. This, of course doesn't mean that it is a good solution to those problems. I find it to be rather unintuitive, nonsensical, and uninteresting.

      Having missile capacity directly related to the group size seems very intuitive to me. Capacity modules would just represent a pool of potential missiles. How much capacity is used would depend on the size of the Missile Tube group that is fired. This would be a straightforward way to handle it.
      The only obvious issue is how to prevent missile spam from a ship with thousands of 1-block missile launchers and millions of capacity modules.
      The current system solves this with a boring all or nothing 200 missile soft cap. I think the only sensible way to really limit missile spam is to let the servers handle it, probably by adding a maximum groups limit to their gameconfig.xml.
      The missile capacity variables can be tweaked all you want, but nothing currently relates capacity to missile tubes or group size. It would just result in a new arbitrary soft cap and I doubt there is any combination that wouldn't result in every ship of a certain size just slapping down the blocks needed to hit the limit.
       
      • Like Like x 2
    Loading...