Recognized Ship Beam sizes

[Blakpik]

Okay, So, I've not managed to find a thread of this, and yes I tried, so I'm assuming it doesn't exist, I could be wrong.

Anyways, all suggestions need a problem to address, and here's the problem of this one. If one were to build a 2,000,000 block megacannon with a barrel 50 blocks in diameter, it'd make... A tiny little bolt. The same size as a single-block cannon would. It's... Comical to say the least.

Now, I could go and suggest that the game magically detect the barrel size and adjust the projectile size accordingly... That would be ideal, But I'm not sure that's possible. Like, that seems to require some content awareness stuff that I don't understand, and I don't just give suggestions if I don't think them possible.

So I am suggesting an alternative, customisable bolt size. So, the larger the cannon, the larger the bolt can potentially be. So, a single cannon block will only fire a single, tiny shot. But a 2,000,000 block cannon can fire a massive shot. But the 2,000,000 cannon can also fire the tiny shot.

So, in the Weapons UI, each weapon has an option for it's projectile/beam size. different weapons have maximum bolt sizes based on their cannon's size.

Naturally, to keep it balanced, cannons with larger projectiles will use the same amount of energy, and thus, the damage will be dispersed over a larger area, instead of focused into a single point. This gives the player the option to make massive, yet focused cannons for sniping etc.

So that's my suggestion... To be honest, the 'Larger barrel = larger projectile' solution would be better in my opinion, (after all, noone builds a cannon with a massive barrel for a small little bolt) but if that's not possible then there's this alternative.

That is all. If you have any questions or explanations on something I worded poorly, please feel free to ask.

Edit: 27/01/2016 15:10(AEST)
Oh, I figured I should say, I know some people make beams look larger by using honeycomb patterns (especially on mining ships), but surely it'll be easier on the game to draw one massive laser, than 200 tiny ones.

 

[NeonSturm]

Now, I could go and suggest that the game magically detect the barrel size and adjust the projectile size accordingly... That would be ideal, But I'm not sure that's possible. Like, that seems to require some content awareness stuff that I don't understand, and I don't just give suggestions if I don't think them possible.

Found a solution:
Draw a boundary around the barrels cross-section, then calculate the distance to the centre of all of them. Tale the smallest radius and keep it until the array changes in a shipyard (ignore damage on it).

 

[jayman38]

My suggestion, linked below, touched on this briefly.

Custom Bullets

I think it would be best to calculate the interception based on the single line (versus your suggestion of volume interception), but add on additional, partial "explosive" and "punch-through" effects as the weapon gets more massive, up to perhaps a server-configurable limit.

The bottom line of the beam portion of my suggestion was to create a "beam ship" that is docked or otherwise attached to the beam computer. When the beam fires, a copy of the "beam ship" is created in place of the normal tiny beam and stretched out to the length that the weapon reaches before stopping (typically another vessel, maybe a planet or asteroid, or maybe it goes out all the way to maximum range as a miss.)

So you could make a 50x50x1 lava circle "beam ship" and your laser beam would look like a massive 50-diameter orange beam. (Dang, I really want this!) Similarly, you could make a 50-diameter ice crystal "beam ship" and have a massive blue beam.

The different decoration blocks available, including lava and ice crystal could give you just about any beam color and transparency you could want. Furthermore, light blocks attached to the weapon computer could "tint" the "beam ship" and make it brighter, giving you even more coloring options.


I would also like to recommend a server-configurable attenuation setting, which allows you to pick what percentage of the total damage is lost over the course of the weapon's range, up to 100%. Alternatively, how many points of damage are lost per meter. (E.g. 10 meters or 0.1 damage per meter)

Example: With a setting of 100% attenuation, a 50,000-damage beam with a maximum range of 2,500 meters hits at a range of 1639 meters for 17,220 damage.

The default attenuation in the vanilla game could be 0%, so that the weapon hits at the original damage at all ranges, just like it does now.


A completely alternative solution that can work right now with existing mechanics, but would effectively lead to massively wide waffle cannons, resulting in heavy lag:
Allow each weapon computer to have more than one weapon output (maybe with a server-configurable upper limit, say 10,000?), so you can pick every surface block as an emitter for your weapon. (Shift-selecting all blocks won't set all blocks to emitters, but would instead allow you to reset all emitter settings to off, so that if you accidentally set a random block deep in a weapon block array as an emitter, you could use this shortcut to reset the whole group and start over.)

 

[Blakpik]

Oh, I figured I should say, I know some people make beams look larger by using honeycomb patterns (especially on mining ships), but surely it'll be easier on the game to draw one massive laser, than 200 tiny ones.

(Will add this to the OP.)

 

[Ravenskysong]

well we can already connect the weapons to a block that changes the color, why not do the same for size? like 5 different sizes and a block for each size, each one more expensive and needing more to make or make the weapon take a bit more power

 

[jgames666]

I think it should be a slider based on the number of modules connected to a computer, and like in the OP give the player an option to set it to a larger or smaller beam size based on the size of the cannon as a whole. Let it be adjustable in the cannon computer.

 

[Ravenskysong]

I think it should be a slider based on the number of modules connected to a computer, and like in the OP give the player an option to set it to a larger or smaller beam size based on the size of the cannon as a whole. Let it be adjustable in the cannon computer.

I feel like slider, adjustable or scaling would be harder to program than a new block with a set size. I also like the idea that if you want a fancy beam you have to do something more, something extra

 

[Benevolent27]

Okay, So, I've not managed to find a thread of this, and yes I tried, so I'm assuming it doesn't exist, I could be wrong.

Anyways, all suggestions need a problem to address, and here's the problem of this one. If one were to build a 2,000,000 block megacannon with a barrel 50 blocks in diameter, it'd make... A tiny little bolt. The same size as a single-block cannon would. It's... Comical to say the least.

Now, I could go and suggest that the game magically detect the barrel size and adjust the projectile size accordingly... That would be ideal, But I'm not sure that's possible. Like, that seems to require some content awareness stuff that I don't understand, and I don't just give suggestions if I don't think them possible.

So I am suggesting an alternative, customisable bolt size. So, the larger the cannon, the larger the bolt can potentially be. So, a single cannon block will only fire a single, tiny shot. But a 2,000,000 block cannon can fire a massive shot. But the 2,000,000 cannon can also fire the tiny shot.

So, in the Weapons UI, each weapon has an option for it's projectile/beam size. different weapons have maximum bolt sizes based on their cannon's size.

Naturally, to keep it balanced, cannons with larger projectiles will use the same amount of energy, and thus, the damage will be dispersed over a larger area, instead of focused into a single point. This gives the player the option to make massive, yet focused cannons for sniping etc.

So that's my suggestion... To be honest, the 'Larger barrel = larger projectile' solution would be better in my opinion, (after all, noone builds a cannon with a massive barrel for a small little bolt) but if that's not possible then there's this alternative.

That is all. If you have any questions or explanations on something I worded poorly, please feel free to ask.

Edit: 27/01/2016 15:10(AEST)
Oh, I figured I should say, I know some people make beams look larger by using honeycomb patterns (especially on mining ships), but surely it'll be easier on the game to draw one massive laser, than 200 tiny ones.

Ok, so I like this idea, but I also think it would need to be carefully implemented and there's a lot more to consider than what may meet the eye. This is a cool idea, and I agree with it for many reasons, but this would dramatically affect the way weapons work. I'll bullet out why I like the idea, what my concerns are, and my proposed refinements.

What I like:
1. If beams/projectiles can be made larger, it would encourage people to use less weapons systems, which may reduce lag.
2. A wide beam would look super cool. A wide, blue beam.

Concerns:
1. If a beam can simply be made wider, thereby spreading the damage out to a wider area, it would nullify the purpose of attaching the tertiary effect, explosive damage.
2. If a player creates a lot of very wide beams, the rendering may cause lag.
3. It would be too easy to just make one very large beam attached to 1 computer system, thereby making a 100% energy efficient system with the least work possible. Right now it costs extra energy to attach more than one separate group to a computer to help balance the fact that the damage is being spread across a greater area. It takes work to spread damage out across different systems on a turret, setting one computer per module grouping. This is part of what a good designer needs to do, spending the time to do it, and they are rewarded for that work. If you take that away, then people who do the least work, making blocks of death, will be rewarded the most. I don't think this is the direction we want to move in.
4. Allowing players to arbitrarily set a beam/projectile size to be very large, even when using one weapons module would be unrealistic.
5. If a player can arbitrarily set the size of of beams/projectiles, anti-missile turrets would become overpowered because they would always hit missiles since their hitbox would be so large.

Refinements (paired by number to the 'concerns' section):
1. There needs to be a drawback to making the beam wider, as there is when using separate groupings. Dividing the damage across the area is not a drawback. My suggestion is to make the beam or projectile take up the amount of energy it would if it were comprised of separate groups. For example, a 2x2 beam would use the same amount of power as 4 separate groups. This would make using explosive effect more efficient but have a smaller hitbox.
2. See 1. It would discourage the use of a LOT of these beams if they weren't as efficient.
3. See 1. Players who separate out the computer/module groupings on their ship (or on turrets especially) could still distribute the damage while maintaining 100% energy efficiency, and so would still be rewarded for their hard work, as they should be.
4. Make the beam size set by the output rows/columns, not as an arbitrary selection system. For example, someone may make a line of damage beam modules going back 50 blocks, but at the front of the group, they make it 3x3. The beam would then be 3x3 in size. If they make it an odd shape, then it simply takes the smallest radius size.
5. The larger the projectile is and the less powerful it is, the slower it becomes. This would balance anti-missile turrets and would also add diversity to the weapons. For example, someone may make a cannon which is very weak, but very large. It would shoot out large, slow-moving projectiles that don't do a whole heck of a lot of damage. However, if there were enough modules attached, it could be a very large and still pretty fast projectile (though not as fast as separate cannon groups).

Well, those are my thoughts, let me know what you guys think.

 

[Ravenskysong]

I thought the issue was how the beam looked, not the damage done. he wants a beam to look more impressive, instead of just a tiny strand of light. I think things like cannons and beams are super tiny little flecks of light and it can be a bit underwhelming, and even hard to see if you hit sometimes

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

1. There needs to be a drawback to making the beam wider, as there is when using separate groupings. Dividing the damage across the area is not a drawback. My suggestion is to make the beam or projectile take up the amount of energy it would if it were comprised of separate groups. For example, a 2x2 beam would use the same amount of power as 4 separate groups. This would make using explosive effect more efficient but have a smaller hitbox.

That line, right there, destroys all existing ship designs that use beam weaponry at all.

Y'know why? because to get their million+ damage per shot beam, they can't simply have all its hundreds of thousands of blocks in a 1 wide line behind themselves.

They HAVE to brick it in, often around whatever role-play rooms 'n corridors their ship has.
(or, simply around the power lines)

You'll need to re-think that bit, ... and everything after it, actually, since they all tie in to that one bit of crazy.


The rest of your post PRIOR to that one bit is spot on though, so congratulations for seeing the problem so clearly.

THE REAL TOPIC:

Oh, I figured I should say, I know some people make beams look larger by using honeycomb patterns (especially on mining ships)

On Mining ships specifically, the "double waffle/double checker" pattern has precious little to do with appearance of the beam, and nearly everything to do with making that "beam" hit as wide an area as possible.

Please, go try making a mining ship where all the salvage modules are touching each other, without the use of a second computer.

You'll get one miniscule beam. (true, with something like 300 modules, it'll rip right through the typical asteroid, but it'll take an age to ine one 'roid)

The typical "checker/waffle" pattern crams as many separate beam as possible into an area, and the "double waffle/double checker" pattern fills in the blank spots that would otherwise take a second mining pass to get.

 

[Peekie30]

Oh, I figured I should say, I know some people make beams look larger by using honeycomb patterns (especially on mining ships), but surely it'll be easier on the game to draw one massive laser, than 200 tiny ones.

(Will add this to the OP.)

also the power cost for 200 little beams is massive in comparison a to one giant beam, because of the 10% power increase per extra output

 

[Benevolent27]

That line, right there, destroys all existing ship designs that use beam weaponry at all.

Y'know why? because to get their million+ damage per shot beam, they can't simply have all its hundreds of thousands of blocks in a 1 wide line behind themselves.

They HAVE to brick it in, often around whatever role-play rooms 'n corridors their ship has.
(or, simply around the power lines)

You'll need to re-think that bit, ... and everything after it, actually, since they all tie in to that one bit of crazy.


The rest of your post PRIOR to that one bit is spot on though, so congratulations for seeing the problem so clearly.

THE REAL TOPIC:



On Mining ships specifically, the "double waffle/double checker" pattern has precious little to do with appearance of the beam, and nearly everything to do with making that "beam" hit as wide an area as possible.

Please, go try making a mining ship where all the salvage modules are touching each other, without the use of a second computer.

You'll get one miniscule beam. (true, with something like 300 modules, it'll rip right through the typical asteroid, but it'll take an age to ine one 'roid)

The typical "checker/waffle" pattern crams as many separate beam as possible into an area, and the "double waffle/double checker" pattern fills in the blank spots that would otherwise take a second mining pass to get.

Um, I have no idea why you are saying what I said was crazy..

If a beam is widened (as per the poster's suggestion) to do damage across the area that would normally take 4 beams, why shouldn't it draw more energy just like 4 separate beams would? But uh, thank you for not thinking the rest of my post was crazy? lol

 

[alterintel]

I also had a similar idea here. Though I didn't limit it to just projectile size... it seems everybody thinks bigger is better?

I like the idea of being able to fully customize our weapons. While the weapon mechanics themselves continue to be largely customize-able, I agree with the OP here that the visual effects could do with some love as well

 

[Peekie30]

or have the beam be divided over selected output blocks, that have to have at least one side touching, essentially creating the custom beam sizes that can vary per beam, dividing their damage over the area. You could have a say 4 group beam array with two high penetration smaller beams with more concentrated power and 2 with a more spread out damage. This could potentially look bloody awesome, as well as allow for further customisation of weapon systems

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

Um, I have no idea why you are saying what I said was crazy..

If a beam is widened (as per the poster's suggestion) to do damage across the area that would normally take 4 beams, why shouldn't it draw more energy just like 4 separate beams would? But uh, thank you for not thinking the rest of my post was crazy? lol

D'oh! I derped. Somehow I assumed that you were posting a counter-argument, with a different system for expanding the beam, rather than a different method of balancing the newly widened beam.

I am terribly sorry about calling you crazy for it, as this appears to have been my own damned fault.

 

[Benevolent27]

D'oh! I derped. Somehow I assumed that you were posting a counter-argument, with a different system for expanding the beam, rather than a different method of balancing the newly widened beam.

I am terribly sorry about calling you crazy for it, as this appears to have been my own damned fault.

lol, it's ok. No worries.
[DOUBLEPOST=1453980014,1453979902][/DOUBLEPOST]

You could have a say 4 group beam array with two high penetration smaller beams with more concentrated power and 2 with a more spread out damage. This could potentially look bloody awesome

This wouldn't potentially look bloody awesome, it bloody well would look awesome!

 

[Criss]

I cannot speak to how this would be implemented. I imagine it will have to be customization simply because of the nature of builds in the game, and at the same time it should not be ridiculous and extend past a barrel. When we get to working on weapons and visual effects I will be sure to bring this up.

 

[Blakpik]

I cannot speak to how this would be implemented. I imagine it will have to be customization simply because of the nature of builds in the game, and at the same time it should not be ridiculous and extend past a barrel. When we get to working on weapons and visual effects I will be sure to bring this up.

Cheers, mate.