Anti-ship Plantery cannon

[IIFitzjohnx]

Will it be possible to create a weapon for orbital defence? creating a large single shot weapon and destroying battle cruisers.

[Mncp86]

Probably

[Thokan]

Probably not. How would you balance something like that? It would be a useless addition that would cause only grief.

[Dinkledash]

IMO there's no reason not to allow massive weapons in orbit, on the planetary surface and as spinal mounts on capital ships.  The problem with a big weapon like that is that if you miss, you miss big, it's very slow to aim and very slow to reload/recharge.  When it hits, yeah, it's spectacular.  It might make sense for use in planetary bombardment, against space stations and against slow capital ships, but such weapons are usually very resource intensive and become sort of a self-licking ice cream cone, as you have to build an entire fleet of escorts in order to protect the Starship Yamato, then you have to build a second wave motion gun to protect the first, and if you ever lost one in battle it would be a massive expense and humiliation, if it breaks down your trillion credit ship is worthless until it gets repaired... so there may be a cool factor to it but if you can get the same job done for less money with less risk with conventional ships and defenses, folks will do that in the long run.

[Lord_Void]

IMO there's no reason not to allow massive weapons in orbit, on the planetary surface and as spinal mounts on capital ships.  The problem with a big weapon like that is that if you miss, you miss big, it's very slow to aim and very slow to reload/recharge.  When it hits, yeah, it's spectacular.  It might make sense for use in planetary bombardment, against space stations and against slow capital ships, but such weapons are usually very resource intensive and become sort of a self-licking ice cream cone, as you have to build an entire fleet of escorts in order to protect the Starship Yamato, then you have to build a second wave motion gun to protect the first, and if you ever lost one in battle it would be a massive expense and humiliation, if it breaks down your trillion credit ship is worthless until it gets repaired... so there may be a cool factor to it but if you can get the same job done for less money with less risk with conventional ships and defenses, folks will do that in the long run.

 

Agreed. As long as it is properly balanced, there is no reason why big guns shouldn't be added in. I think timing would also be important. They should be released well down the road so that they don't overly affect the beginning stages of social development.

[Tumeden]

You guys seem to be missing the fact that you can't miss shooting someone.   It's 'lock and fire' PvP.

 

Basically you pick your target, fire, and based on your own stats, and the stats of the other player will result in whether you win or lose.

 

It's not going to be a first person aim and fire, and see who the better person is.

It's going to be a lock on a target, and fire and the person with the better guns/stats wins.

[AccuNut]

You guys seem to be missing the fact that you can't miss shooting someone.   It's 'lock and fire' PvP.

You are correct, however..from what I understand, you might miss if your targeting stats aren't as high as the opponent's evasion stats. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

[Lord_Void]

You are correct, however..from what I understand, you might miss if your targeting stats aren't as high as the opponent's evasion stats. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

 

I believe there is an element of chance to it, affected by skills, so that there is always a chance of missing. Other factors would affect it too such as the size of the target, the distance and the radial velocity. Big guns like those mentioned here will probably have horrible tracking speeds so they would only really be able to hit big and slow ships, or stationary targets.

[Lethys]

I don't see a problem with those big ass guns, when balanced right.

 

the lock on fire system could be more of a problem: I just HATED Xcom2 for that whole probability chance thing.

95% with a minigun from 2m - miss.

5% with a shotgun from 45m - critical hit.

[Lord_Void]

I don't see a problem with those big ass guns, when balanced right.

 

the lock on fire system could be more of a problem: I just HATED Xcom2 for that whole probability chance thing.

95% with a minigun from 2m - miss.

5% with a shotgun from 45m - critical hit.

 

Yeah that system always struck me as odd and immersion breaking. I think the system here will (hopefully) be more streamlined. NQ has said they want to make the lock on system so streamlined that you often don't even notice it.

[QuantumInc]

You are correct, however..from what I understand, you might miss if your targeting stats aren't as high as the opponent's evasion stats. I could be wrong, but that is how I understand it.

It's early enough that the developers haven't decided yet. Though personally I think it would be a good idea. Eve Online does not simulate the collision of individual shots, but like any RPG it does have a formula that determines if an attack hits or misses. It is absolutely "lock and fire" but a big gun can't hit a small fast ship (if the ship is moving perpendicular to the line of fire.

 

Two other things to keep in mind: For the sake of balance a long range weapon must deal less damage over time than a short range weapon. Also the developers have already said that bases will have special shields that will prevent attackers from destroying anything the moment they arrive. It is implied to be similar, again, to Eve online where a base can become invulnerable for several hours or days, long enough for the defenders to log on and then organize a defense. The defenders control how long the countdown to battle is (with enough resources), and the attackers determine when it starts ticking. I like the idea of it, but a long range defensive cannon would be pretty annoying to anyone trying to conduct a siege.

[Dinkledash]

You guys seem to be missing the fact that you can't miss shooting someone.   It's 'lock and fire' PvP.

 

Basically you pick your target, fire, and based on your own stats, and the stats of the other player will result in whether you win or lose.

 

It's not going to be a first person aim and fire, and see who the better person is.

It's going to be a lock on a target, and fire and the person with the better guns/stats wins.

Yes and size of the target will be a factor, so shooting a spinal mounted wave motion gun that fires once every 60 seconds at a fighter would be silly.  And I'm sure that even though you're locked, if the target gets out of range or arc, you lose your lock on.  You can lock on with a big cannon, and if you have max skill and max tech and your opponent is driving a dumb steel slab like the captain of a garbage scow, there's no reason not to blast him out of space with it.   

[Sasha9k]

If we can build without limit (size), then there should be some "super weapons" for planetary defense and ship's.
In every strategy game (like DU) there are big ships, but also enormous weapons systems to destroy them.

Bigger - stronger, but it need more time to reload, more time to lock, more time to fire - and lot's of resources to build it, make an ammo or energy for fire. 

And... everything have it's weakness... Titan's in EVE are powerful - but it's a paper when it's alone.

[CaptainQuoth]

Balance is important. Cant have world shattering weapons without some sort of trade offs.I have faith that the game will be set up so people arent running around with full auto doomsday cannons.

[Hades]

Probably not. How would you balance something like that? It would be a useless addition that would cause only grief.

 

Hmm, I disagree.  I think it could be balanced fairly easily.

 

If it's a slow firing, large projectile weapon that takes out major sized ships... then small fighters can blitz around without a care in the world.  Furthermore, it would add another level in a takeover of a base

[Precise_Calibre]

The following are just spur of the moment thoughts I had.

 

You could set up a system where such large weapons require a time of charging and calculation in order to fire.  I liked how they depicted this idea in the novel "Halo:  Fall of Reach" where the AI had to charge the MAC cannon and develop a highly complex firing solution in order to accurately launch an attack with such a powerful one-shot weapon.  Anything else would have been pot-shots with wasted resources.

 

Represented in-game, it could be an attack with a long wind-up and an obvious targeting to the person being fired at.  It would work only with a low percentage chance of hitting, increasing if a target is stationary and almost impossible if a target is moving rapidly.  It could be used as a coup de grâce against a crippled ship or as a precision high-powered attack against a structure.  Obviously damage to a mobile ship in space would be more devastating, as a building can have a large hole punched through it and still remain standing without  have to worry about the forces exerted on a massive moving ship.

[CaptainQuoth]

The following are just spur of the moment thoughts I had.

 

You could set up a system where such large weapons require a time of charging and calculation in order to fire.  I liked how they depicted this idea in the novel "Halo:  Fall of Reach" where the AI had to charge the MAC cannon and develop a highly complex firing solution in order to accurately launch an attack with such a powerful one-shot weapon.  Anything else would have been pot-shots with wasted resources.

 

Represented in-game, it could be an attack with a long wind-up and an obvious targeting to the person being fired at.  It would work only with a low percentage chance of hitting, increasing if a target is stationary and almost impossible if a target is moving rapidly.  It could be used as a coup de grâce against a crippled ship or as a precision high-powered attack against a structure.  Obviously damage to a mobile ship in space would be more devastating, as a building can have a large hole punched through it and still remain standing without  have to worry about the forces exerted on a massive moving ship.

Basically this to deter anything as large as a destroyer or bigger coming in and just razing the base or city you would have to use fighters which are to fast and small for them to hit to take out.

 

Without some area of denial razing a city is as easy as parking a few cruisers on it and waiting till its nothing but rubble.

[borzol]

i dont think that canon like that can work because when you are on the ground what you see on orbit is like minute or two old image .... how can you hit something that is no longer there?

[GrimReaper]

i dont think that canon like that can work because when you are on the ground what you see on orbit is like minute or two old image .... how can you hit something that is no longer there?

Lol... now here's someone who thinks before posts.

 

Good point, definitely forgot to think of that lol.

 

With that said, we don't really know how combat will work.  It's not FPS, but what precisely does lock and fire look like?  It's not supposed to be *tab target, and they have elaborated on the issue... but I would like to see it in action before I come to conclusions.  So we wait, I guess

 

*In the sense of a traditional tab target game.

[CaptainQuoth]

i dont think that canon like that can work because when you are on the ground what you see on orbit is like minute or two old image .... how can you hit something that is no longer there?

You mean there is two minutes of lag or it takes 1-2 minutes to get to orbit?

[borzol]

You mean there is two minutes of lag or it takes 1-2 minutes to get to orbit?

no lag.... bigger the distance from the object is the less frequent is position updated of that object

[CaptainQuoth]

no lag.... bigger the distance from the object is the less frequent is position updated of that object

Assuming if anything in the game had that kind of range there would be a way to compensate for that.

[borzol]

Assuming if anything in the game had that kind of range there would be a way to compensate for that.

Devs said that there wont be sniper like gameplay in DU and i think canon like that counts as sniper gameplay

[CaptainQuoth]

Devs said that there wont be sniper like gameplay in DU and i think canon like that counts as sniper gameplay

At any rate that means that its range is reduced it would still function as an area of denial weapon preventing people from parking a ship over your base or city and bombarding it with weapons until there is nothing left but a crater.