The *responsible* warhead rebalancing thread.

[Dr. Whammy]

There are some pretty effective logic-based delivery methods that I've seen. One person currently has a system that can shoot multiple torpedoes a second at a velocity of close to 300m/s.

Basically, there are effective delivery methods, you guys just have to find them. :p

Delivery was never really a concern. There is no shortage of launcher ideas (not including my own) out there.

The real issue is that we need for the things to be able to inflict some kind of reasonable damage when they hit. Scratching the paint on a single block of armor isn't enough to make it worth anyone's while to use; neither is blowing a one meter wide hole in a 500 meter long ship. On the other hand, while effective, relying on a clipping/glitch is essentially an exploit; which will go away eventually.

The collision lag issue is another major concern. I build everything from homing weapons, to MIRVs, to full-auto launchers and after trying to bring my creations into the multi-player world, they lagged the server to pieces prompting me to jettison and destroy my 100x launcher and decommission its design.

These are the things that need to be discussed in order to come to any kind of unbiased conclusion.

 

[Lukwan]

One disadvantage to using warhead torpedoes is that they are the only the weapon that is volatile. They may be detonated before they are launched so there is an element of Risk/Reward that I like. There is agreement that balance is crucial. I agree the warheads need a buff but I don't know how much.

I would like to put a radical idea out for discussion: Re-work the Torpedo as a unique class-weapon. Lets avoid lag-bombs where we find them.

1) Torpedo Launch-Computer (C/V) links to Torpedo Tubes (modules) using Warheads that are stored on a linked Cargo-Area (just so they can be blown up...you know, just for fun) Aim for the magazine! The number of Torpedo tubes in the group determines the payload/Damage.

2) Warheads remain as meta items (Ammunition) and are consumed when launched. Warheads can then be used to provide constraint in the system. To avoid getting OP the Devs can tweak the requirements for making warheads.

3) Mechanics. All of this uses current game mechanics.

4) In Addition: Yes, Torpedoes should be big and slow. They should look like a fancy torpedo with an impressive thruster plume and Bloom and their size should scale with damage. Turrets should be able to target (and prioritize) them in the AI. They should retain Ident-codes and trigger War-declaration. Torpedoes should have a few HPs...like 5 or 8.

5) What Torpedoes will not need: A laggy old core. A bunch of laggy old Logic. Collision issues.

 

[Madman198237]

So, glorified nuke missiles? Really? Sorry, but I highly disagree with taking this bit of block-based functionality and reducing it to yet another weapons system (Though I won't usually argue with adding another weapons system, we already HAVE a missile launcher, and you can set up a large missile-pulse if you really want a big slow missile).

 

[Zekester81]

Torpedoes should be big and slow

Absolutely not. I have made a torpedo that will do 3k m/s. My small torp does 450 m/s.

Despite the lag issues, I would not want a system like that anyways. We already have almost that by slaving damage pulse to a regular missile system. Big and slow powerful missiles.

 

[Mortiferum]

*stations

Add that to the equation for a moment.

Store bought warheads > Hours of work in a defense station.

Balanced? No.

It heavily limits gameplay, especially the "expansion" aspect of it as now even a 300 shield, 900 million regen/sec station can be crippled easily by a single cattle prod.

 

[nightrune]

Stations would be my one concern with high powered warheads but only if point defense couldn't get them.

 

[Mortiferum]

Stations would be my one concern with high powered warheads but only if point defense couldn't get them.

Add in an equally disposable cloaker and jammer block on a 50m long power stick.

 

[BJammin]

Damn, this thread is like a rollercoaster...

Honestly, I would like to see some more work done on warheads' usefulness. As a player who really enjoys the 'meta-engineering' aspect of this game, I've always been slightly disappointed about the (lacking) performance of torpedoes (though it could just be I haven't found a good design yet).

Heh, not sure how " responsible" this discussion was earlier (*cough* page 2 *cough*), though I can't help but laugh at how worked up some of you guys get over this stuff.
I mean, let's be real. When's the last time any big change occurred in this game as the result of a suggestion thread?

 

[LunaIsBestPony]

The real issue is that we need for the things to be able to inflict some kind of reasonable damage when they hit. Scratching the paint on a single block of armor isn't enough to make it worth anyone's while to use; neither is blowing a one meter wide hole in a 500 meter long ship.

Actually, the delivery system I saw was quite devastating to my 10k mass frigate for only having fired 10 bullets, each with only 2 warhead blocks.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Add in an equally disposable cloaker and jammer block on a 50m long power stick.

Your concern is valid; no one wants a giant ramming cloak-able torpedo; stealth bombers/frigates yes but absolutely no one has posted here in favor of stealth torpedoes.

On the other hand, numerous anti-cloak-abuse options were mentioned. What do you think of them? If you don't like them, do you have an alternative solution?

An important thing to remember is that (shields or no shields) we aren't trying to get something that's going to blast a 75 meter wide whole in anyone. The idea behind this is synonymous to a bee sting. You're going to notice when you're 'stung' but (barring allergies) it's NOT going to kill you. Let's not act like it's a shotgun to the face.

Seriously guys; I'd like to hear more ideas on how to prevent griefing and abuse, such as cloaking suicide bombers, preferably without totally taking away the ability to cloak a bomber or frigate. After all, stealth bombers and submarines are real.

I'll tweak this part of my previous idea and I want to know what you guys think of this.

- you could make them weigh as much as advanced armor. That would make it harder to cloak a weapon like that.
- make warheads start to lose "antimatter containment" near powerful electromagnetic fields; causing them to give off a radiation that disables your cloaking/jamming when you get within 1/10 of a sector away from the closest block on a ship, station or planet. On average, that's between 500-1000 meters.

Don't focus on the numbers; it's only an example. Focus on the idea and consider if such a thing could work to stop abuse.
[doublepost=1469150110,1469150000][/doublepost]

Actually, the delivery system I saw was quite devastating to my 10k mass frigate for only having fired 10 bullets, each with only 2 warhead blocks.

Was the damage tweaked or did it use the clipping/exploit?

 

[Zekester81]

Seriously guys; I'd like to hear more ideas on how to prevent griefing and abuse, such as cloaking suicide bombers, preferably without totally taking away the ability to cloak a bomber or frigate. After all, stealth bombers and submarines are real.

I doubt you could ever stop a player from building a cloaked ship and using it on a suicide run. Someone will find a way. Now, to my knowledge, an AI cannot use that either so nothing to worry about with cloaked torps and such. Your idea of adding mass to the warhead block is good, but it will slow torpedoes down too probably.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

I doubt you could ever stop a player from building a cloaked ship and using it on a suicide run. Someone will find a way. Now, to my knowledge, an AI cannot use that either so nothing to worry about with cloaked torps and such. Your idea of adding mass to the warhead block is good, but it will slow torpedoes down too probably.

Regarding speed; the slow down won't be that bad for a single block. Honestly, I think that's a good trade off for balance. Pick your poison; damage or speed.

I'm more interested in why you think this part won't work; especially if it affects the entire chain-docking assembly.
- make warheads start to lose "antimatter containment" near powerful electromagnetic fields; causing them to give off a radiation that disables your cloaking/jamming when you get within 1/10 of a sector away from the closest block on a ship, station or planet. On average, that's between 500-1000 meters.

 

[Zekester81]

I use multiple warhead blocks on my torps, with an armor casing on them, leaving the warheads exposed on the front only actually.

I'm more interested in why you think this part won't work; especially if it affects the entire chain-docking assembly.
- make warheads start to lose "antimatter containment" near powerful electromagnetic fields; causing them to give off a radiation that disables your cloaking/jamming when you get within 1/10 of a sector away from the closest block on a ship, station or planet. On average, that's between 500-1000 meters.

I don't feel the need for it if scanners are fixed. Why add something in to do what an already existing thing should do: expose cloaked entities. With proper fixes to the scanner, this would be unnecessary.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

I use multiple warhead blocks on my torps, with an armor casing on them, leaving the warheads exposed on the front only actually.

I don't feel the need for it if scanners are fixed. Why add something in to do what an already existing thing should do: expose cloaked entities. With proper fixes to the scanner, this would be unnecessary.

Sorry if I have to grill you on this but you really didn't answer the question.

Would it or would it not, stop the abuse of cloaked suicide bombers? Anyone else can answer too; I want to hear all the options available.

As far as redundancy goes; keep in mind, this is only a side effect of having warheads on or in your ship's chain-docking assembly. No warheads on board means they need a scanner to find you.

 

[Zekester81]

Sorry if I have to grill you on this but you really didn't answer the question.

Would it or would it not, stop the abuse of cloaked suicide bombers?

What about "unnecessary" do you see as not an answer. It's a band-aid solution to a problem that can be fixed by a system that is already in place if it's corrected. My answer is that I don't care if it would or not, because this wouldn't be an issue if scanners were fixed. You cannot force me to a different answer just because you don't understand the one I gave. You gave choice A and B, I opted for C. Apologies if this sounds angry, it's not.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

What about "unnecessary" do you see as not an answer. It's a band-aid solution to a problem that can be fixed by a system that is already in place if it's corrected. My answer is that I don't care if it would or not, because this wouldn't be an issue if scanners were fixed. You cannot force me to a different answer just because you don't understand the one I gave. You gave choice A and B, I opted for C. Apologies if this sounds angry, it's not.

So, what you're saying is; you don't want to answer the question that was asked so you chose to evade it entirely. What's worse is that you didn't even explain what you meant by fixing scanners.

I'm trying to get constructive feedback on a potential solution to a problem that's been mentioned repeatedly. I'm pretty sure it would work with little to no consequences. Would someone else like to answer the question?

"If carrying warheads caused a ship to lose its jam/cloak when it enters a certain distance of another ship/station/planet, would it stop cloaked suicide bombers?"

 

[Zekester81]

So, what you're saying is; you don't want to answer the question that was asked so you chose to evade it entirely. What's worse is that you didn't even explain what you meant by fixing scanners.

I'm trying to get constructive feedback on a potential solution to a problem that's been mentioned repeatedly.

The player already has tools to decloak enemies, it's called a scanner. This puts the counter in the hands of the player, without having to introduce a new mechanic to do the same thing that nerfs the attacking players ability to use the mechanics put in place for him to do so.

Scanners have one weakness. If you're on the border of a scannable sector, you could be attacked by said cloaked bomber from right over the border of the next sector, even when using your scanner, that is the problem with scanners that I feel should be fixed.

I don't see why a mechanic would need to be introduced to solve something that players already have a way to solve, using in-game mechanics, provided that we have the ability to scan an area of space surrounding our ships, not tied to a specific sector. I feel this is the best approach to countering stealth, not making warheads nerf stealth.

If you don't see this as constructive feedback, then I'm sorry, but it is. I'm not evading the question, I just don't see the need to ask it in the first place when we already have a mechanic that the devs intended to do this very thing.

 

[Madman198237]

The problem is that we need offline protection against the use of cloaking bombers (Which should have to carry warheads as separate munitions [i.e. torpedoes, dumb bombs]). AI cannot use scanners yet. I believe that the scanning system should have a complete rework anyway, but that's a different suggestion.

Warheads should certainly nerf stealth somehow---we don't WANT players playing kamikaze with stealth prods just because it works well, we want them putting effort into taking out something that someone else put effort into.

 

[StormWing0]

lol I'm the type of warhead user that drops off a time delay multistage warhead bomb and bugs out before getting shot. With shootout rails it is even easier to make the thing and pepper the whole target with death. Keep in mind any changes that buff warheads have to take into account the fact people aren't machines and can't be awake 24/7 to guard their stuff contrary to what the massive amount of caffeine is telling you right now.

 

[Zekester81]

Then a really simple solution is to suggest that scanners be activated by logic so you can set up a logic clock scanner. This may be moot when they introduce NPC stuff in, when you might be able to assign an NPC to run periodic scans even when you're not logged in. Plus, if you're offline when it happens, what could you do about someone just coming in and blowing the hell out of everything anyways not even using a cloaker?