Weapon thoughts

[bricox01]

Some general thoughts regarding the eventual weapons update:

1. Have a computer that acts as a master firing control computer. Any weapon computers linked to it are fire-controlled via this computer. This should solve the problem of firing multiple different weapon systems at once.

2. Give each module block type an output block sub-type. Handle it in the same way that hull wedges are in terms of crafting. The player would place the weapon modules as normal, then place one or more outputs. The damage is then divided between the outputs.

3. Weapon orientation should be based on the orientation of the weapon blocks or the output block if #2 is used.

4. Have secondary and/or tertiary effects handled in a similar way as chambers are being done in the power 2.0 update.

5. Find a way to make turrets no longer an actual separate entity. There should be a way to incorporate C-V linking to determine which blocks are part of the parent or part of the child once the turret is built.

6. Allow the fire control computer from #1 to link to a turret mounting point and grant firing control over the weapons in the turret.

7. If #6 is used, possibly create a tracking computer module with the following modes:
a. Cursor: the turret will attempt to follow the mouse cursor. It will not fire if it becomes blocked.
b. Selected: the turret will attempt to follow the selected target. It will not fire if it becomes blocked.
c. Area: all turrets in the group will aim to saturate a 45-degree cone in the direction the pilot is looking.
d. Group-Auto: the turrets in the group will ignore pilot input and will attack viable targets as a group.
e. Auto: the turrets will ignore pilot input and will attack viable targets individually.
f. Point Defense: the turrets will ignore pilot input and attack viable targets individually prioritizing incoming missiles first then others based on proximity.

I'll certainly add to the list as I think of things or as others make suggestions. I'm really just spit-balling thoughts here. If the game devs want to use them, cool. If not, also cool.

 

[Dire Venom]

Some good thougths there bricox01 .
Just some further devekopment:

1. You can already do this with Wireless and logic. However you cannot aim it with your mouse or see cooldowns.
Further improvements to this system could involve some way to aim a variety of weapons at once as well as lock on while also firing cannons for example.

2.This would defiantly help with checkabord designs and would make building multiple arrays much less complex. A nice quality of life improvement.

3. You can already determine weapon orientation based on the computer. However trying to aim sideways or backward cannons isn't that easy and more quality of life improvements for broadside/alternate camera firing would be appreciated.

4. Certiantly possible, you already can drap and drop different computer to connect them in the weapons menu.

5. Not too sure what you mean, turrets generally need to rotate and thus need to be separate entities for this to happen without significant clipping problems.

6. Defiantly an idea worth pursuing. I would like to see a lot more done with camera firing, weapon feedback, broadside/non-frontal weaponry, alternate battle controls and aiming and better turret-ship integration as well as AI control.

As far as camera and ship control goes, I think an option for an alternate battle interface such as an outer perspective with keyboard control would work fantastic (Like in fractured space for example)

With various dots/circles/markers (maybe like WoW??) to show where the selected turret group is aiming.

 

[bricox01]

I'm big on quality of life type suggestions. I leave game balance to others. Since the balance can be mostly rebalanced via config files, I see little value in forcing my balance down other's throats.

 

[Arcaner]

Whoa! Some excellent suggestions there. Though a couple of them are already possible using logic, (#1, #3, #4 and #6(use wireless logic here)) I really liked #2 as it would improve building a LOT.

Now, we come to #5. I understand what you mean. Turrets, ATM don't seem "connected" to the main ship apart from dockers. Once shot off, they lose any linkage with the mothership. There doesn't seem to be any way to change this, I suggest you try and optimize the current system to your best.

 

[bricox01]

Another follow-up regarding weapons in turrets:

• Alter C-V linking to work more smoothly across entities. Do away with marking as it is and preserve the C selected module across entering different entities.
• Allow modules to link back through the entity to which the barrel and turret are docked.
• Require only the primary modules and the control computers of a weapon system to be in the "barrel" of the turret. Secondary and effect modules can happily be in the turret or the ship.

This shouldn't be over-powered as loss of the barrel entity will still knock out the whole weapon, leaving the rest of the ship with a bunch of dead weight.
The benefit would be in greater freedom of module placement, allowing the turret to look more like you intend it to.
If I'm on crack here, please tell me.

 

[Calhoun]

• Alter C-V linking to work more smoothly across entities. Do away with marking as it is and preserve the C selected module across entering different entities.

• Allow modules to link back through the entity to which the barrel and turret are docked.

• Require only the primary modules and the control computers of a weapon system to be in the "barrel" of the turret. Secondary and effect modules can happily be in the turret or the ship.

This would be stupidly broken.

 

[bricox01]

This would be stupidly broken.

Fair enough. But please elaborate on how.

Also, on rounds, I figured being able to go beyond the turret itself would be problematic. What about just down to the turret itself? I mean, 100% of the modules of the primary would have to be in the barrel entity, as would the computers for the secondary and the effect. But what about the modules for the secondary and the effect being in the turret entity instead of being limited to the barrel entity? If all modules were to remain with the turret assembly, it should be fine.
In terms of balance, it should only be unbalanced if one group is able to do something that another competing group cannot.

 

[Dire Venom]

This would be stupidly broken.

Or more so just in-compatible (and very potent) with the current way ships are built.
I would like to see some more options for turrets, however I mostly just resort back to using ball turrets though 90% of the time as having a barrel as fat as my ship doesn't look very appealing :/
[doublepost=1506419287,1506418259][/doublepost]

Fair enough. But please elaborate on how.

Also, on rounds, I figured being able to go beyond the turret itself would be problematic. What about just down to the turret itself? I mean, 100% of the modules of the primary would have to be in the barrel entity, as would the computers for the secondary and the effect. But what about the modules for the secondary and the effect being in the turret entity instead of being limited to the barrel entity? If all modules were to remain with the turret assembly, it should be fine.
In terms of balance, it should only be unbalanced if one group is able to do something that another competing group cannot.

Some good thougths there.
Regarding turret construction, I agree that it is very much 'barrell' focused atm. You only realy need a small base with mass enhancers and a fat barrel and your good to go. I would personaly like to see some of the functionality of the barrel moved to the base as well so that making well proportioned turrets is easier.

With ball turrets for example, you are able to have the majority of the turret encased by the ship with very little wasted space and fantastic rotation. That alone makes them very powerful. Being able to encase 66% of the turret in the the actual ship would be pretty potent and allow far better protection of the emittor.

Currenlty clever tricks are used to create good looking, but space effcient turrets such as this:

As you can note, the barrel itself is essientialy the whole turret with the visual "barrels" there just for decoration and looking good.
Currently turret designs such as these:

Are far inferior to ball turrets due to 95% of turret blocks being required in the barrel.
You can find a suggestion thread for this here:
2ndary + Tertiary effects in Turret bases, PLUS new tab for Turrets

Other things to consider/related disscusion:

Does having secondary and tertiary effects in the base result in a significant/substantial combat advantage? (e.g. how do shields for turret base vs barrel work at the moment?) If the punishment is purely visual that's much less problematic than if there is substantial game-play advantage to having effects in the base.

Weapon DPS is based on overall block count (primary+secondary+effect, just keep in mind that secondary and effect can't exceed primary). So the problem Nickizzy points out is quite valid; for a pure cannon weapon to have the same DPS as one with a secondary and effect, it would need the same block count, but all of that block count would have to be in the barrel, making it necessary for the barrel to be at least 3x larger than it would have to be with a secondary and effect in use instead.

 

[bricox01]

I need to look into turrets based on the former image. I am currently building turrets based on the latter.

 

[sayerulz]

I think that one of the biggest things that needs to be adjusted is the damage/size/power consume ratios for weapons. Do that, and making effective turrets that don't like stupidly oversized relative to the main ship would be much easier.

 

[Madman198237]

The problem is that I like my battleship-style turrets, super-efficient or not!

But yeah, these people practically make a living killing people and taking their stuff working the in-game math---listen to them. Sadly enough, ball turrets (That make the turret "casing" part of the BARREL, rather than the base) are more efficient than non-ball designs.

 

[bricox01]

It's not just efficiency. I'm seeing some ideas unfold in my head. They're actually more to do with the defense of the turret. The way it's handled, more of the turret is beneath than above.

It also solves a problem I've been having withe turrets clustered close together, then interfering with each other.

However, I also like the naval-style guns too. I'll probably mix the two. I'm thinking about using the ball designs for my mdium turrets.
[doublepost=1506531422,1506530232][/doublepost]Here's a couple of screenshots of my current designs. They are most certainly not PvP competitive. They are pretty good at killing pirates though.
The big ones, from the bottom:
Heavy Corvette: Lots of forward killing power, not so much point defense or AMS though.
Destroyer: Kind of a failure, really. Not enough long-range killing power or defense or speed.
Light or Escort Cruiser: Not so bad, useless vs other large ships though.
Heavy Cruiser: Same general hull layout, but uses M/c turrets to hit hard from a longer range.
Battlecruiser: The precursor to my fast battleship. Good at soaking damage while delivering big M/c hits.
Heavy Destroyer: Does what it's supposed to, but I don't like it. Still haven't figured out why.


Here's a close-up of the battlecruisers main batteries. They're why I made the turret suggestion above. The barrels are hilariously long.

As you can see, they all have a decidedly space battleship Yamato thing going on. It's an aesthetic I quite like. My hope is that Power 2.0 will allow me to make them better and closer to the way I want them to work.