Suggestion for missile slave on beams and cannons

[Cluwne]

Your point would be valid if missiles were a DPS weapon, but they are not a DPS weapon, they are an alpha strike weapon.

What about regular dumbfire missiles? What about Missile+Cannon combination?

 

[Coyote27]

"DPS" and "Alpha" are a false dichotomy imported from MMORPGs and MOBAs; they're a bad way of describing more realistic combat damage models that don't rely on "hit points" because the actual results on target are what matters and not the numbers. Real ships are not arbitrarily deep volumes of a single h0mogenous block type.
This discrepancy isn't only limited to StarMade, though - it even happens in real-world weapons development. We don't wage wars or send police raids against blocks of ballistics gelatin.

 

[GDPR 302420]

Now that you mention it, a numeric comparison of missile efficiency and other weapon types is valid and highly relevant to this thread.

Of course it is, the thing is your comparrison is not valid because you are assuming that missiles are a DPS weapon, the test where you compared a DPS weapon like Cannon to an alpha damage weapon like Missiles.

Then again, you oppose ANY kind of rebalance so the concept of comparing numeric data for that expressed purpose was obviously lost on you.

I do not oppose "any kind of rebalance"

I oppose rebalance that is stupid and/or comes from people who have been playing long enough to where they should know what they are talking about but have absolutely no clue about game mechanics, such as yourself.

What about regular dumbfire missiles? What about Missile+Cannon combination?

The missiles that are actually used are alpha damage weapons, Missile+Beam and in some cases Missile+Missile.

Missile+Cannon has no issues with DPS, the reason you do not see them used is due to the fact that their projectile speed is slow and that they are vulnerable to PDs, which makes something like cannon+cannon more useful.

 

[DrTarDIS]

"DPS" and "Alpha" are a false dichotomy imported from MMORPGs and MOBAs; they're a bad way of describing more realistic combat damage models that don't rely on "hit points" because the actual results on target are what matters and not the numbers. Real ships are not arbitrarily deep volumes of a single h0mogenous block type.
This discrepancy isn't only limited to StarMade, though - it even happens in real-world weapons development. We don't wage wars or send police raids against blocks of ballistics gelatin.

I see DPS or "Alpha-strike" as the difference between attrition engagement vs a surgical strike. You try to plan for both. Then you plan for both the attacker and defender roles in both. Then you try to play to your and the games advantages to control the fight into ones you're good at. I'm hoping the chambers really push that.

 

[Cluwne]

A good Missile+Cannon combo eats system blocks faster than tumblrina landwhale eats her pineapple pizza though.
Once you get shield and armor out of the way you can hollow out pretty much any ship in under a minute.
I guess those are better suited for bombarding stations, but still!
Plus, with many outputs this combo generates a generous amount of targets, which might let a beam or even a pulse missile slip past the PDs.

I'm hoping the chambers really push that.

I wouldn't hold my hopes high. If anything, chambers will likely push you either to be a jack of all trades master of none or specialize in something.

The days of ships that can excel in everything are numbered.
Soon you will really have to know what you are doing, otherwise your ship will always lose to more specialized ones.
Maybe even the doom cubes/sticks/barbells are not safe - they may have to choose either protection, firepower or utility...

 

[GDPR 302420]

A good Missile+Cannon combo eats system blocks faster than tumblrina landwhale eats her pineapple pizza though.

Sure, Missile+Cannon could do that if your target is 100% immobile and has absolutely zero-anti missile defences.

Once you get shield and armor out of the way you can hollow out pretty much any ship in under a minute.

Same thing can be done with any other weapon.

I guess those are better suited for bombarding stations, but still!

And you can achieve the same (or even better) results with other weapons.




Missiles as a whole do not need any changes to damage potential, they are already balanced as is.

The reason people such as Dr. Whammy think that missiles are "underpowered" in terms of damage is because they lack any understanding of basic game mechanics, yet when they participate in discussion of said mechanics, they pretend they do.

 

[Cluwne]

I wonder if instead of the rеtаrdеd shotgun we could have a burst fire or some sort of charge mechanic for slaved missiles.

Same thing can be done with any other weapon.
And you can achieve the same (or even better) results with other weapons.

Mis+Can will do that faster though, which is kinda important in combat.
And you can't really beat the blast range of an actual missile with explosive effect.

Missile+Cannon could do that if your target is 100% immobile and has absolutely zero-anti missile defenses.

When you use something like that it's usually against a target whose shields you dropped already.
Perhaps you could use a good general-purpose cannon+cannon to pop the PD turrets and finish 'em off with missiles? Meh, whatever.

Anyway, what's the point in having multiple combinations if everyone only ever uses a lock-on missile+beam, even with only a single beam block for the lock-on. Already balanced my ass.
Devs should bring back the three flavors of missile guidance, if only as settings in some menu.
Also add some goddamn IFF on heat-seekers. Ships have very specific, fingerprint-like heat signatures, don't they?
Why can't missiles use them to prevent them from attacking your faction's stuff?
#MakeMissilesGreatAgain

 

[Coyote27]

Devs should bring back the three flavors of missile guidance, if only as settings in some menu.

What was the other guidance system besides the current lock-on and heatseeker? I wonder if a TOW-like "follow the cursor" type of guidance would be popular? It might make hitting evading targets easier, and would definitely help with precision targeting, at the cost of consuming player effort and time that can't be spent doing something else.

Also add some goddamn IFF on heat-seekers. Ships have very specific, fingerprint-like heat signatures, don't they?
Why can't missiles use them to prevent them from attacking your faction's stuff?

Faction blocks should definitely work as IFF against heatseekers, since their entire purpose is to fill that function in every other IFF sense.
I'd also kinda like to have launchable flares to distract heatseekers, but that'd probably be too much effort to add to expect to ever see.

 

[Cluwne]

What was the other guidance system besides the current lock-on and heatseeker?

If memory serves me well there were heat-seekers, lock-ons and dumbfire missiles.

TOW-like "follow the cursor"

I don't think they would differ much from regular lock-ons. You need to be fairly close to steer it to where you want it to hit.
Maybe something like an interceptor missile would fill the role of flare countermeasures?
It distracts the heat-seekers and intercepts the lock-ons. Killing two birds with one flak round and all that.

Faction blocks should definitely work as IFF against heatseekers

Faction blocks are more of a transponder, heat-seekers pick their targets with IR sensors.
Though I guess you could write it off as faction block storing ship's heat signature for some kind of faction signature base.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

RedAlert_007

This is where you demonstrate that your opinion is worth what we pay for it. Jack shit.

First, you think that a shotgun rebalance somehow breaks the balance of the game by hitting "everywhere" on a ship, which shows not only that you know nothing about how shotguns work, but you've also somehow missed the fact that current shotgun weapons are largely ignored because, they try to hit 'everywhere' on a ship. You even somehow misinterpreted my word "adjustable" to mean "on the fly" rather than by block count which is how you adjust firing rate, range, projectile count, etc. on every other weapon in the game.

You jump on the band wagon of missiles having "double damage per block", only to to be shown that missiles are in fact, significantly underpowered compared to other weapons. You fail to make a valid counter point then strawman your way to a weak argument about DPS vs Alpha; which is irrelevant to the discussion.

So this brings up a few questions.

1) When was the last time anyone won a fight with a shotgun weapon; not including swarm missiles?

2) Is it balanced when a C/C rig outperforms literally every other weapon in the game in terms of DPS, block destruction rate and area saturation?

3) How are missiles not considered underpowered when they lose an average 50% of their base damage to open space, lose more damage due to blast radius limitations, are the only weapon that can be destroyed in flight and have only 66% of the DPS potential of an unmodified cannon vs heavy regenerating shields?

4) Why are you the only one who has offered no constructive input on this topic?

Perhaps it's you who needs to learn more about game mechanics before talking about balance.

 

[GDPR 302420]

Mis+Can will do that faster though, which is kinda important in combat.

No it can't. Comments like this are the exact reason why I always say sheet DPS is meaningless

90% of your "damage" is going to miss the target because the projectile speed is so slow that unless your target is 100% immobile you will not hit.

In addition missiles are vulnerable to PDs, which reduces their damage futher.

Sure Missile+Cannon has good DPS on paper, but in practicality, its useless.

First, you think that a shotgun rebalance somehow breaks the balance of the game by hitting "everywhere" on a ship, which shows not only that you know nothing about how shotguns work, but you've also somehow missed the fact that current shotgun weapons are largely ignored because, they try to hit 'everywhere' on a ship.

The current meta makes shotgun weapons non-viable because you can do structure HP damage without needing to target a specific point.

HOWEVER in the looming Systems 2.0 update, structure HQ is turning into consolidated "reactor HP" which in order to find that paricular area to do "reactor hp" damage, you gotta use the new information warfare stuff they are adding, but why do that when you can use an area saturation weapon such as a large waffle or a shotgun style spread weapon to skip the information warfare step entirely.

You even somehow misinterpreted my word "adjustable" to mean "on the fly" rather than by block count which is how you adjust firing rate, range, projectile count, etc. on every other weapon in the game.

It seems I did misenterpret you, maybe you should explain your suggestion better, without going into more detail you leave your statement open to interpretation.

You jump on the band wagon of missiles having "double damage per block", only to to be shown that missiles are in fact, significantly underpowered compared to other weapons.

Neither you or anyone else has failed to show shit, your validation was comparing the DPS of a DPS weapon to the DPS of an alpha strike weapon.

Seeing as you like to use debate jargon to avoid addressing points, the debate jargon that describes your "test" is called confirmation bias.

You fail to make a valid counter point then strawman your way to a weak argument about DPS vs Alpha; which is irrelevant to the discussion.

My counter point regarding DPS vs Alpha is perfectly valid, you are simply using the "b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but you did a strawman" to avoid having to address the point itself. Good ol' Dr. Whammy using debate jargon to sweep perfectly valid criticism under the rug.

So this brings up a few questions.

1) When was the last time anyone won a fight with a shotgun weapon; not including swarm missiles?

I like it how you said "not including swarm missiles" because you knew if I mentioned swarm missiles you whole argument would fall apart.

But putting aside swarm missiles, I can name several examples where area saturation has triumped both recently and in early StarMade (back in the days when Vaygr had brown ships with ice crystal early days)

But if you expect me to remember the names of serversiders who fought against other serversiders and won, well I got bad news for you bud.

But there are instances where area saturation has won an engagement, how about you join a PvP server and see for yourself? oh wait...

2) Is it balanced when a C/C rig outperforms literally every other weapon in the game in terms of DPS, block destruction rate and area saturation?

If that was actually the case, then no that would not be balanced.

Unfortunately cannon+cannon is not the "be all end all best meta weapon" in StarMade, for multiple reasons including.

• Block destruction rate on cannons is not as good as you imply, missiles beat cannons there
• Cannon+Cannon becomes useless at long ranges, missiles and beam+beam weapons beat cannons there
• Cannons are not the best for area saturation, I can achieve the same or even better results with missiles or beams.

3) How are missiles not considered underpowered when they lose an average 50% of their base damage to open space

They have double damage per block specificly to compensate for this 50% loss, are you suggesting that we should take the existing damage buff and double it again!?

lose more damage due to blast radius limitations

Bugs are supposed to be fixed, not used as a basis of balance.

Also, in spite of this, they are still better then cannon+cannon or anything short of Veilith's beam+beam "Hacky Bullshit" turrets in terms of block destruction, as demonstrated by factions like Vaygr Empire and Infinite Legion.

are the only weapon that can be destroyed in flight

If we didnt have the ability to shoot down missiles, missiles would be unstoppable by any means short of jumping out (unless its not a homing missile, but they are about as usefull as pulse)

have only 66% of the DPS potential of an unmodified cannon vs heavy regenerating shields?

Key word, DPS

Move those goalposts bud and learn about something called "alpha damage"

You don't even have to be a good PvP to understand what alpha damage is.

4) Why are you the only one who has offered no constructive input on this topic?

I have offered constructive input, you just don't like being told you are wrong and thus brush it under the rug using debate jargon or just saying "grr non-constructive grrr" to avoid having to address it.

Seeing as you like to use debate jargon to avoid addressing points, the debate jargon that describes your dismissal of relevent points is called stonewalling.

Perhaps it's you who needs to learn more about game mechanics before talking about balance.

The lack of knoweldge you have has lost you this debate on several threads before this one, lets not make this the 6 or 7th thread that gets locked because you go into a "Grr PvP Grr" flamewar.

 

[Zyrr]

Please come fight me if you think C/C has the best DPS in the game.

 

[GDPR 302420]

Please come fight me if you think C/C has the best DPS in the game.

Yo Dr. Whammy if you are so confident that you are right, perhaps this is your chance to prove me wrong

 

[Az14el]

snippy snip wrong thread-ish stuff was here

 

[Dr. Whammy]

RedAlert_007 / Zyrr
Yeah, it's pointless to talk to you two.

So... you dismiss the OP and all the members who agree that the weapons need to be looked at, comment on things you don't understand, dismiss data relevant to the thread, offer no data of your own, remain in denial of the fact that Schine IS going to rebalance the weapons whether you like it or not, then expect me to take time out of my day to come play with you?


If you have something of relevance to add to the thread, you can post your data here. No one but you cares how good you are at PvP.

 

[GDPR 302420]

This is your message, but its more honest to what you are actually saying/feeling.

I have no means of winning this debate and I refuse to admit that I am wrong because its hurts my pride to admit to members PvPers who actually have a clue that I am wrong so I am going to make a shitty response post that doesn't address any of the perfectly valid and constructive points brought up and make it look like I am leaving on my own terms.

So... you dismiss the OP and all the members who agree that the weapons need to be looked at

I never dismissed any suggestion of weapon balance, I agree that weapons need to be looked at. Ideally all weapons should be viable in some manner.

What I DID do was give my input to both the op's original suggestion and your flawed logic and numbers.

comment on things you don't understand, dismiss data relevant to the thread, offer no data of your own

You have demonstrated on this thread and others that it is you who does not understand, every time you open your mouth about balance, you are told you are wrong and you don't like being told you are wrong, one thing leads to the other and the thread gets locked.

Also, I dismissed YOUR DATA because you are trying to compare apples with bananas on which fruit makes the best apple cidar.

And best thing yet, I did offer data of my own, I alongside others told you about the double damage per block missiles have to compensate for 50% of it not being applied to the target.

remain in denial of the fact that Schine IS going to rebalance the weapons whether you like it or not

I am not in denial that Schine rebalances weapons, in fact I am open to the idea of weapons rebalance because the current state of weapons needs a lot of work.

However I will oppose ideas/suggestions are a detremental to gameplay, redundant, useless, broken, counter-intuitive or otherwise shitty, such as your input and suggestion that missiles are """""""underpowered""""""

then expect me to take time out of my day to come play with you?

I don't expect you to "come play with me"

Zyrr was offering you an oppurtunity to prove your statements correct, which you turned down for reasons that are cleary not related to you not liking being told you are wrong.

You see Dr. Whammy you have gotten into this conversation time and time again and you have lost this debate time and time again, I am suprised you don't just give up and accept that you have quite literaly no idea what you are talking about and thus are in no position to have any input on threads of balance where at least SOME KNOWELDGE of the subject is required.

 

[kulbolen]

i wonder if its a coincidence that every top tier combat ship uses beams and missiles.

 

[Zyrr]

I'm just wondering if I can show you that C/C isn't the best DPS weapon in the game + demonstrate the difference between theoretical (on paper) DPS versus functional (what you actually get) DPS. I promise, it'll only take a few minutes and you might just leave enlightened. Or perhaps not, it doesn't matter to me. I'm putting forth the effort to teach you, but whether or not you want to be taught is entirely up to you.

 

[silverfoe]

I'm just wondering if I can show you that C/C isn't the best DPS weapon in the game

Can you please show, I'm keen to learn.

 

[Zyrr]

Sure, let me know when you have some time to fight and what mass of ship you can bring. I have access to a server.