Why don't we use Gaussian distribution for weapon dispersion.

[Crashmaster]

Well my figures are a bit different; with the distances we are dealing with if we take 'sub-millimeter' as roughly 0.0001m at 1m then that translates to 0.5m at 5000m.

All of this is pretty moot anyways due to overall generally horrible accuracy of shooting at moving ships in a multi-player game that tends to be a bit laggy - especially so when you are shooting at moving ships.

edit; and this is probably the reason I don't like this idea;

 

[Comr4de]

even for such mundane tasks as healthcare, accuracy is already sub-millimeter.

Hahahaha, I like you

 

[Master_Artificer]

I have literally felt the force of a thousand face-palms, and have been resurrected from the dead to see whats up.

So, making guns more accurate by adding a random dispersion to them causing you to be unable to predict where your shots will land?


Mm'k, I must be missing something, could you explain that again?

 

[FlyingDebris]

If anyone else has any good Ideas to add to this leave a post. I'm open to improvements.

Basically no.


the soviets once welded a cannon to a space station and blew up a satellite well beyond visual range. If they could do that in the '70s, surely an advanced spacefaring civilization won't build guns that'll put projectiles 3,000 arc seconds off of the target at only 20 kilometers.

 

[Master_Artificer]

Basically no.


the soviets once welded a cannon to a space station and blew up a satellite well beyond visual range. If they could do that in the '70s, surely an advanced spacefaring civilization won't build guns that'll put projectiles 3,000 arc seconds off of the target at only 20 kilometers.

Dude. 50 Arc Minutes is a lot to miss by, thats like nearly twice the diameter of the moon when you look at it in the night sky.

 

[FlyingDebris]

Dude. 50 Arc Minutes is a lot to miss by, thats like nearly twice the diameter of the moon when you look at it in the night sky.

That's less than the shotgun cone of fire is currently by a substantial amount.

 

[sayerulz]

Why would this apply to beams? I seen no way that a laser would fire in a different direction every time. And its silly anyway. I bealive what he wants is to be able to shoot in a direction and have some of his shots hit his target even though he is missing. To him I say: aim better, or let the AI do it.

 

[Caahrnage]

No argument seem to be relevant to me in all this thread Xd.
Just the one about "realism->starmade->joke"

But something ring bells in my ears : why a player can shoot 1000 bullet at the same spot at 5Km with a stationary turret and the AI cant ?

I can understand that for gameplay issue AI is less accurate but in the stationary situation ..... that feel a bit clunky to me.


Anyway : if a human (with lower prediction capability than AI) spread fire on a moving target, he will get more chance to hit than shot the same point several times. (for example : a 100m ship moving at 100 m/s at 6Km from a stationary turret/gun with amc+amc)
That is why "lazy to check the name" said "spread fire is more accurate". Useles but true in a way.

 

[shadowulf]

AI are brutally accurate if you move in a same flight path on their highest setting. Now, for dispersion, yes the gun will have flaws. Yes, the magnetic field will have fluxes, but in modern terms our accuracy with laser can be brought down to nanometers, and the accuracy of a barrel is actually really good for a projectile that doesn't touch the barrel when firing. I don't believe this mechanic will be good for starmade due to the amount of coding needed to change the mechanics.

 

[Crusade]

Personally, I am all for slight inaccuracy with SOME weapons. However, they should not be inaccurate all the time. First few shots needs to be pinpoint as they are now, and gradually get less accurate the longer you hold down the trigger for rapid fire things (minus beams, they stay accurate). This means to maintain accuracy over distance with rapid fire weapons, you'll have to burst fire them.
I personally believe we could do with weapon recoil too, but that's an entirely new can of worms.

TL;DR
Would be good, if done right. Would lead to more specialised weapons/gameplay.

 

[PIE_OF_DOOM]

Personally, I am all for slight inaccuracy with SOME weapons. However, they should not be inaccurate all the time. First few shots needs to be pinpoint as they are now, and gradually get less accurate the longer you hold down the trigger for rapid fire things (minus beams, they stay accurate). This means to maintain accuracy over distance with rapid fire weapons, you'll have to burst fire them.
I personally believe we could do with weapon recoil too, but that's an entirely new can of worms.

TL;DR
Would be good, if done right. Would lead to more specialised weapons/gameplay.

Ok you just sum up what I want to see in a much better way then me.

 

[Mr.Steam]

Modern tanks have gyro/electronic stabilized guns that can shoot with like 95% accuracy at 4km away. All while moving over rough terrain. I like to think Starmade guns have stabilized weapons that are much more advanced. Really they should be able to calculate lead time/angle and put a shot right through a porthole on a moving ship (as long as the ship maintains consistent direction and velocity) from at least 10km away. I personally think the weapons are not accurate enough as they are dependent on the person manning the weapon to manually calculate the lead time.

 

[Matt_Bradock]

Where I could see this is actually AI accuracy, instead of deliberately aiming to miss on lower settings (seriously, that's annoying. Like a dime-a-dozen bad guy trying to hit the hero in a '90s B-action movie with a full-auto weapon) they could use a Gaussian spread that depends on the AI difficulty settings, so they stand a tiny chance at actually hitting their intended target even if it's not the size of a planet plate.

 

[Lecic]

Where I could see this is actually AI accuracy, instead of deliberately aiming to miss on lower settings (seriously, that's annoying. Like a dime-a-dozen bad guy trying to hit the hero in a '90s B-action movie with a full-auto weapon) they could use a Gaussian spread that depends on the AI difficulty settings, so they stand a tiny chance at actually hitting their intended target even if it's not the size of a planet plate.

As Azereiah said earlier, that requires a lot more math. It's easier to just have the AI spaz around its virtual cursor.

 

[PIE_OF_DOOM]

Where I could see this is actually AI accuracy, instead of deliberately aiming to miss on lower settings (seriously, that's annoying. Like a dime-a-dozen bad guy trying to hit the hero in a '90s B-action movie with a full-auto weapon) they could use a Gaussian spread that depends on the AI difficulty settings, so they stand a tiny chance at actually hitting their intended target even if it's not the size of a planet plate.

Part of my point is to have a unified aim system between the two.
[DOUBLEPOST=1443051415,1443051303][/DOUBLEPOST]

As Azereiah said earlier, that requires a lot more math. It's easier to just have the AI spaz around its virtual cursor.

Don't we all ready have the distance value in the form of max distance for weapon. All we would need then is a probability curve of where your shot lands at said distance. Then shot goes in strait line to it.

 

[Jaaskinal]

For all the well deserved ragging on this with weapons that you have lots of control over (beams and cannons mostly) I can see why it would *work* with shotguns. Having a calculation on the accuracy of anything with a missile secondary might work. IIRC that's been shot down in the past though.

 

[Winterhome]

Part of my point is to have a unified aim system between the two.
[DOUBLEPOST=1443051415,1443051303][/DOUBLEPOST]
Don't we all ready have the distance value in the form of max distance for weapon. All we would need then is a probability curve of where your shot lands at said distance. Then shot goes in strait line to it.

That's... not how math works. At all.

That's REALLY not how the math on a flying projectile works, since it's not a hitscan projectile.

 

[jstenholt]

I can't even... I don't think I've ever seen this negative a response to a suggestion here before. Just no...

 

[PIE_OF_DOOM]

Why dose everyone ignore the fact that I said that it could just be a config? I know I didn't explain it right and I am over simplifying it but I was not expecting this much of a back lash to the idea. Its not like I'm suggesting that we get ride of shields or something like that. Kinda upset that not many people consider this as a way to fix the cannon/missile spread ether.

 

[Lecic]

Why dose everyone ignore the fact that I said that it could just be a config?

Alternate config options still need to be worked on by devs, unless you want them to become massively outdated like Breakoff or Collision Damage.

Kinda upset that not many people consider this as a way to fix the cannon/missile spread ether.

I'd rather we just get a standard, symmetrical spread.