Jump to content
Anaximander

[CvC] Call of Duty : Pythagorean Warfare

Recommended Posts

 
WARNING : LONG POST AHEAD. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED.
 
 
 
Construct VS Construct, the point of debate and curiosity of many people. 
 
"This is not like Star Citizen's World War 2 in space dogfighting battlecruisers, what gives?"
 
"What gives" are the distances involved.
 
 
Space is big, really big, therefore, spaceship battles won't be operated within 100 meters between each ship, as even WW2 battleships, fought at 5+ Km worth of distance between each other, so, it's only logical that a starship will have to utilise some of the same principles of compensation of weaponry for these distances, in a non-simulated combat enviroment like DUAL's. So, we'll have to take into account that projectiles are NOT physical objects, therefore, everything can come down to raw stats comparisons and statistics' inputs
 
So, without any further ado :
 
 
TWERKMOTOR's   Call of Math : Pythagorean Warfare. 
 
(sorta my idea, for all I know, the Devs have already thought of this)
 
 
This thread will focus first on :
 
1. The Way a turret can aim in First Person View and Lock-On, as well as the gameplay around it.
2. How to make the "miss" mechanism believable, instead of floating letters that say "Dodged!"
3. How each individual damage model could function on this model of CvC.
4. How Automation will be hindered by this mechanic. 
5. Multicrew functionality and the Emergent Gameplay around this mechanism as weaponry wears and tears with usage.
 
This thread will NOT focus on :
 
1. Damage calculations
2. Material integrity on ships' armors.
3. If the fight between a large battleship and a helpless Space-trucker is fair. (It won't be, get over it).
 
So, let's do this.
 
DISCLAIMER : If  you are allergic to math, this is your warning. I won't be dwelling into how or why ratios are the numbers they are. Learn how to calculate triangles' sides with only the angles provided, then make an arguemtn against this model. This is a suggestino for the Devs, you won't be seeing equations on your screen, but a neat interface of circles the close in on the target to improve your accuracy and damage consistency on the area of effect you go for.
 
 
 
1 .  The way a turret can aim in First Person View and Lock-On. (A Good Day to Lock Hard)
 
 What are Cones? A cone is a three-dimensional geometric shape that tapers smoothly from a flat base ( most of the times ) to a point called the apex. 
 
Exactly. If you look at a cone from its side, it is a triangle, therefore, time to implement Pythagorean Theorem. We can utilise Cone of Fire, by having the distance of the target dictate the surface area we can generate Damage Bubbles (think of the Mining Tool, only operated differently to accomodate Voxel Durability and Weapon Type).
 
A Cone of Fire, in most First Person Shooters, is the circle at the center of your screen, indicated via the crosshairs surrounding it. That area, is where your bullets will fly to, the more you fire the gun, the more the Cone Spreads, because the barrel overheats, which is simulated in the game with the Cone expanding, until your bullets fly everywhere BUT your target, therefore, missing all of those shots.
 

"How does this applies in DUAL?"

 

 
Simple, you aim at a ship, you lock-on the ship, then begin Compensating before you fire, establishing a Base Area on your Cone of Fire in which Damage Bubbles will be dispersed. The tighter the Cone, the more consistent the damage bubbles on the place you want them to be will be.
 

"Wait, what Compensation?" 

 

 
Compensation is, as we all know, the act of taking into account things like bullet drop, gravity, windage and all that, when a sniper or an artillery operator, or a turret operator on tank or a ship, is planning a trajectory for their projectile.
 
In DUAL, that can be emulated with a predefined time of "tightening" the Cone of Fire's Appex Angle, to reduce the Base Surface Area in which your target is in. YOu can fire at your enemy as soon as you see them, just don't expect to hit them really much, if they are like a fly at 100 meters, but if you take your time tightening the Cone of Fire, your chances of creating a Damage Bubble on the target increase dramatically ,as the Base Surface Area decreases.
 

"Damage Bubbles... how many will there be on a salvo?"

 

 
Depends. How many rounds does your Ballistic Turret holds in its magazine? 10? Good, you get 10 Damage Bubbles dispersed in your Cone of Fire's Base Area.  Make sure you compensate hard, so you make all 10 count, and pray your ship's navigator is keeping the ship steady.
 


"Some serious math please? You suggested serious math."

 

 
Okay, fine, if you insist..
 
A wild Spaceship appears. You, on the space station you work for your organisatipn, jump on one of the defense Turrets set for them pirates to be deterred.
 
 
You notice the Pirate ship is at 10 Km aways, but  you have a problem given the distance. You are Doctor Bones from Star Trek, you're a doctor, not a gunner.
 
So you wait, knowing you can't get a tight Cone at such distances, but within 100 m, you will be just fine, so you lock-on the target and begin Compensating before you click to fire the turret.
 
Within the 1 Km range, given you have NO skills invested into Gunnery Training, you begin Compensating the target, which means you narrow the Cone of Fire of the Turrets initial Cone of Fire of 30 Degrees (for the sake of the example, numbers will be kept round).
 
Within the 0.5 Km, you are 50% compensated. Within 100 meters, you are 100% compensated. Now, the Turret is not magical, it has a minimum Cone of Fire, which is 5 degrees.
 
 
Now, if you were to shoot at the target at the 1 Km mark, the Base area would be.
 
B = 223,760 Km^2
 
Because of Cone Calculations where :
 
Initial Cone of Fire Appex angle= 15 Degrees
Lnegth Distance from target = 1000 meters
Slant Distance = 1035 meters
Base Area Radius = 223.760 Sq. Meters 
 
Now, that area of 223,760 Km^2, seems pretty bleak on the possibility of hitting... anything, right? Exactly.
 
But on the 100 Meters Compensated Shot, you get
 
B = 251.83 Sq. Meters
 
Where :
 
Final Cone of Fire Appex Angle = 5 Degrees (compensated at 100% )
Length Distance from target = 100 meters
Slant Distance = 100.4 meters
Base Area Radius = 251.83 Sq. METERS
 
Oh boy, seems like you will be melting those pirates within those 100 meters... but then again, you had to wait for them to practically be right in front of you. And you were on a station... a stationary station... you would have not to suffer from motion loss of accuracy.
 
 


"Motional loss of Accuracy?"

 

 
In simple terms, if you Compensate while moving, you take FAR FAR longer to fully compensat, if your pilot moves up and down and left and right, that may cause even the Cone to widen even more due to that. Get a good navigators for your ships.
 


"How can I, as the ship being fired upon, dodge the attack?"

 

Is that a segue ? Why yes it is :D
 
2. How to make the "miss" mechanism believable, instead of floating letters that say "Dodged!" (How to do the Harlem Shake is Space)
 
On the aformentioned example of a turret locking, compensating and firing, we had a Base Surface in wihch the Damage Bubbles would occur in, their number dictated on the turret's magazine size and their ratio of popping up, on the Weapon's fire rate. 

"How can I avoid that kind of lock-on and fire, someone could lock-on to me and compensate from 10 Km away if they got the skill training and I will get melted before I can reply. UNFAIR, OMG, UNFAIR"
 

 

 

Chill, the great brains behind spacecraft building got you covered. Remember that  base surface area on the cone? Well, the cone can't "target" voxels it cannot spotlight with its surface area. 
 
A. Have a slim fronta profile on your ship, means you mitigate the chance of a direct hit.
B. SPEED IS KEY. When the other guy lock's on to you, their weapon's projectile speed is put up in comparison to your speed and direction, as well as Distance between you two. If your speed is greater than your attacker's projectiles and you move away from them, then the "damage bubbles", take time to appear, therefore, creating a sense of missing the target, while making you actually feel that you were responsible for the opponent missing the shot. Your ship's surface area exposed to the enemy, dictates your chances of being hit in this Cone of Fire suggestion. Learn to fly with style and always keep your slim profile facing the enemy, or your reinforced side, I don't care, it's your ship.
 

"Doesn't that mean I have to be practically next to the target to be hit by them if their turrets projectiles are very slow?"
 

 

 

Only if they have ZERO skillpoints invested into gunnery. A player who invested heavily into gunnery will start pumping lead into you from kilometers away.
 


"Will I have to make combat maneuvers to avoid being turned into a cheese wheel?"

 

 
Yes. Just because space is empty, doesn't mean the smartest way to go from Point A to Point B is a straight line. Lua scripts are needed for that reason,  preplanned maneuvers that throw your enemy's aim off.
 


"But what about different weapon types? There will be laser turrets and missiles and all that stuff."

 

 
Oh, another segue. Lucky me.
 
3. How each individual damage model could function on this model of CvC.
 
Kinetic Weapons = They have certain speed, they come in varieties of ammunition typ,e from armor piercing to simple chunks of metal in a the form of a giant bullet, for them railguns. They follow the standardised model of compensation, as described above.
 
Energy Weaponry = This is tricky and depends on the type of laser. If the laser is based on a fission explosion with the cannon directing a very dense X-rays wave in the direction of the enemy, then the laser would be using the Cone of Fire, as an interference-to-distance pattern, which means the laser's damage is divided equally on the surface area it is applied, which means that a laser can do X amount of damage, but it is divided across the surface area it is applied.  If the laser is a Lamp-style laser, then it has a "charge-up timer" replacing the Compensation mechanism, which makes it very precise, but very slow to ramp up to the task.
 
Explosives = They can be missiles that will go DIRECTLY where you aim them and depending on their quality and distance, they can counteract a ship's lateral speed bonuses on avoidance of the missile's Damage Bubble. Good for taking out engines, IF you manage to tail the opponent to get a good shot at their engines. Bombs are also a good way of looking at this, althought they won't be as "smart" as the missiles are, for a much more powerful boom.
 
Electromagnetic weaponry : Same deal as the Lasers, only they can't do damage to Voxels, but they can scramble electronics.
 


"Does that Laser logic with it losing power at a distance, make any sense in the game?"
 

 

 

Yes, it means you can wear down an enemy's shield as you approach for a firing pass with a fission laser, then use your heavy hitter railguns and missiles to do the real damage.
 


"Those missiles sound op."

 

 
Those missiles sound expensive. You will know who is a bad pilot, from the amount of missiles they use. 
 


"Bombs?"

 

 
Yes, aim at a target, like a hovertank, fly over them, let the bomb go. Boom.


"Electromagnetic Weaponry can't damage voxels?"

 

 
They can sure as heck damage an enemy's sensors, flight controls and drain shields. Makes for some sweet sweet specialised ships that can do nasty things in battle.
 


" Well, I'll build an automated ship with missiles and win."

 

 
Another segue ! (Got bored on trying to come up with something stupid :D )
 
4. How Automation will be hindered by this mechanic.

 
You may build a torpedo boat in space, sure, but you're running on an inherit problem here.
Lua scripts will have limit on how many actions they can execute per second. Players though not, especially if they are a multicrew ship, not to mention all those Lua scripts will have a very VERY heavy tax on your RAM. Good luck playing a game at 10 frames per second.
 


"What can a crew will have to do exactly on board a ship? They will be just repairing damage"

 

 
Have you ever heard of Battery Crews on ships? Also, segue.
 
 
5. Multicrew functionality.
 
Weaponry, with use, should suffer loss in quality and durability. For example, a turret, would gradually get its initial Cone of Fire enlarged, after being used repeatedly in battle, requiring recalibration to reset its Cone of Fire to its original state. It would also need repairs, because it got hit once or twice, and it would sure as heck require reloading.
 
These things should be taken care of by a Battery Crew, engineers who work together with the Gunners to ensure a Turret works as intented. 
 


"Why not use Lua scripts for those tasks?"

 

Because Lua will require power from the ship to run, power you could be using powering your shields longer, or having extra acceleration to catch up to a target. 


"Who would want to play THAT role of the Battery Crew?"
 

 

 

I don't know, who would want to play a space-trucker? Or an explorer, or a miner? Or a craftsman? Or a builder? That's right, many people.
 
A dedicated Battery Crew, can be seen as those dedicated healer players in other MMOs that a guild is looking for all the time. We got to remember, a ship's crew will be an org on their own. And once people start seeing how effective those Battery Crews can be in combat situations, there will be a paradigm shift on what Emergent Gameplay can be. If you like keeping alive your budies to keep melting the enemy, a Battery Crew is your thing, as you are the last line of defense before the ship shuts down.
 
 
BONUS ROUND OF QUESTIONS 


"Well, this whole CvC thing sounds like an instant win if a guy has a stealth cloak on his ship"
 

 

 

They are called surprise attacks for a reason. And just because they got the Alpha Damage on your, doesn't mean you can't retaliate.
 


"This thread had not that many math in it, how so?"

 

 
Wait till you see the comments below.


"I wantz eatz bourger and playz games. I wantz no peoplez on ship me. I wantz nots hards PvPz"
 

 

 

Welp, this is not the game for you then :| It is not meant to be simple, as JC said time and time again, if they had not achieved the Kickstarter, they would have to simplify. Lucky for us, that won't be the case :|
 
"That's a very cosntructive post you've made Twerk, good job! See how good a post can be if you put effort into it?"

 

 

 
Said noone ever.
 


"I don't get it. How will Skills play into this and how can Emergent Gameplay rise around it?"

 

 
By accelerating the Compensation timer and mitigating the Compensation timer penatly from moving and the distances involved. A Rank 5 Gunner with a Rank5 Advanced Turret Training, will be able to engage the enemy at 5 Km (as a rough example), therefore, giving his ship a greater range on the battlefield.
 
A builder wil lhave the chance to research and produce Turrets a faction uses due to its tactics, therefore securing a market spot for his or her own. 
 
A miner will know that his faction favors iron, because they rely on Railgun tactics for Metal Storm barrages of turrets towards the enemy, therefore actively scanning for iron and mining iron to support their faction's war effort.
 


"Thanks a lot Twerkmotor, I was planning on being a Top Gun, but your suggestion, my playstyle is stupid, I will be blown to bits in seconds."

 

 
Hardly. Your star-fighter is so small, that you would be throwing the enemy's aim off consistently. If they decide to go for a lock-on missile on you, you took one for the team. Also, you are flying with a squadron of other people, on star-fighters, on am ission to destroy a battleship's turrets. It's a suicide mission to begin with, but the good news are that you, as a jet-fighter, can be equiped with a missile launcher and actively go after the enemy's turrets It's amissile, it doesn't require any power generator to power up a laser or anything, it can fly on its own. In any case, good luck you crazy Top Gun you. o7

 
"Your ideas on the Laser Cannons that distribute their Damage equally on the surface area they strike... why do I get EVE Online Titan vibes out of it?"

 

 

 
Nobody said you can put only ONE laser turret on the front of your ship and Lua rig them all to fire on a common point at the same time. If it was me for example, I may put 10, 100, or, heck , 1000 laser turrets, rig them to fire at once and watch as ships disintegrated in the distance under the immense heat of the impromptu Doomsday weapon. The real question is, if you can sustain the cost of such a weapon. Not to mention the Doomsday weapon would be a very high maintenance weapon. We're talking of an I-Win weapon that has a cooldown of days or weeks on having all its turrets recalibrated, or God forbid, repaired.
 
While you cannot build a planet-destroying Death Star, nobody said the Death Star can't simply evaporate a Dreadnaught with sheer firepower. :|
 


"Hmm... building an EMP array of turrets to fry pirates' ships if they get near my borders. Would that be possible?"

 

 
Yes. But then again, no pirate in their sane mind would go near a place with such a defense system installed. Not unless they use Stealth Modules and manage to blow your turrets up with a lightning assault on your station.
 
"Hmm... JC suggested in interviews of possible ways of moving your viewpoint to a 3rd Person view. With the same logic, can't you make a Turret you operate snipe a target further away?"
 

 

 

I don't know. If they can transfer your viewpoint to another cluster, so you can have a closer rate of updates so you would be able to aim better at what you want to hit, maybe, but then again I'm making a suggestion for the CvC, not for sniping :|
 
"This smells of foul play. Twerkmotor, are you up to something?"

 

 

 
Well, up to something, not really, over something... maybe. Would I want to drop something to someone from over them as I drift in orbit on my ship? Hell yeah and you do too, don't lie ;)
 
=====================================================================================

Thanks for reading this sort of long post.

Here's a scientifically accurate potato clock.


3e71b98a-c1de-47bb-8e22-c2896f2198d8.jpg
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhh... what is a damage bubble?

and I can potato math thank you very much!

fe6cbe60b4c763ba351eb7edcd40ac0e_origina

 

 

 

 

 

 

Think this, but spawned as a weapon Damage Bubble, that "slowly" edits voxels, aka, damaging them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fe6cbe60b4c763ba351eb7edcd40ac0e_origina

 

 

 

 

 

 

Think this, but spawned as a weapon Damage Bubble, that "slowly" edits voxels, aka, damaging them.

Ohh.

Thought it was a like really strange projectile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might take out the entire point of your idea but...

I really want no-lock on weapons.

Well, that's the Combat system. It is an active lock-on system :|

 

Scan => Lock => Fire.

 

The missiles are simple working on a variable to that :|

 

It still takes timing and expertise to know when and where to fire your turret at.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to use the "Law of Sines" to solve your math problem.  Not the Pythagorean Theorem (although they ARE related)

 

Given a known Apex angle and a given distance, you don't have enough information for the Pythagorean Theorem. (which requires a right triangle and TWO sides) You DO have have enough information for the "Law of Sines"

 

30 degrees and 1000 meters

 

First cut the triangle in HALF to come up with a Right Triangle (90 degrees).  

This will give you a second angle, to complete the Law of Sines.

 

THE LAW OF SINES:

Sin A   =  SIN B  =  SIN C   (where A, B, & C are angles which total 180 degrees)

    a              b             c

 

A = 15  (half of 30 degrees)

B= 90  (Right Triangle)

C= 75  (180 degrees - A - B  )

a= unknown

b= unknown

c= 1000 meters

 

Sin 15  =  Sin 90  = Sin 75

    a               b          1000

 

.2588  =   1  = .9659

    a          b      1000

 

Solving for a

.2588  =  .0009659 a

267.94  =   a

 

Solving for b

1  =  0009659 b

1035.30 = b (the hypotenuse of the right triangle)

 

Now we know the RADIUS of the Cone at 1000 meters, which is 267.94 meters.

 

Area of a circle = Pi * Radius^2

 

A = Pi * 71791.8436

 

A = 225,540.72 sqr meters  or 225.5km^2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to use the "Law of Sines" to solve your math problem.  Not the Pythagorean Theorem (although they ARE related)

 

Given a known Apex angle and a given distance, you don't have enough information for the Pythagorean Theorem.  You DO have have enough information for the "Law of Sines"

 

30 degrees and 1000 meters

 

First cut the triangle in HALF to come up with a Right Triangle (90 degrees).  

This will give you a second angle, to complete the Law of Sines.

 

THE LAW OF SINES:

Sin A   =  SIN B  =  SIN C   (where A, B, & C are angles which total 180 degrees)

    a              b             c

 

A = 15  (half of 30 degrees)

B= 90  (Right Triangle)

C= 75  (180 degrees - A - B  )

a= unknown

b= unknown

c= 1000 meters

 

Sin 15  =  Sin 90  = Sin 75

    a               b          1000

 

.2588  =   1  = .9659

    a          b      1000

 

Solving for a

.2588  =  .0009659 a

267.94  =   a

 

Solving for b

1  =  0009659 b

1035.30 = b (the hypotenuse of the right triangle)

 

Now we know the RADIUS of the Cone at 1000 meters, which is 267.94 meters.

 

Area of a circle = Pi * Radius^2

 

A = Pi * 71791.8436

 

A = 225,540.72 sqr meters  or 225.5km^2

Have you learned math differently wherever you come from? The Pythagorean Theorem is a generalisation that includes the Laws of Sines and Cosines.

 

You only need the fact you calculate for a Cone to find the surface area. You got 90 Degrees (which are given on an even cone), then you have the distance, which is 1000 and the angle, which is 15. Then you can calculate everything else.

 

Also, your calculations are off.

 

On a 15 angle Appex, the Hypotenuse is 99.6% of the Opposite (which is 1000).

 

The Adjacent will be 25.9% of the Opposite, and the Opposite is 1000 (meters).

Adjacent = radius of the cone.

 

Radius of the Base of the Cone = 259 meters. 

 

So yeah, your calculations are a bit off. :| Your method is an optional method, I don't doubt if it has merit or not, the numbers have spiked a bit off though.

 

That, or my trusty calculator decided to play magic tricks on me, on which I took it on myself to consult online claculators and they turned back the same results :| And your results seem wrong on that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pythagorean theorem REQUIRES two sides of a triangle.

 

You DONT HAVE that with the information you specified.  You provided a 30 degree apex and a height of the cone of 1000 meters.

 

The Law of Sines allows you to compute all angles and sides using TWO angles and one side.  (which you do have by cutting the cone/triangle in half)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, your calculations are off.

 

On a 15 angle Appex, the Hypotenuse is 99.6% of the Opposite (which is 1000).

 

Since WHEN was the Hypotenuse EVER SHORTER than another leg on a right triangle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you calculating the surface area, or are you calculating the area of the base?

Base surface area. >.> 

 

Which is P*r^2

 

I guess your calculator rounded up the numbers, it doesn't matter at this point. The thread is about the princple of utilising Cones of Fire as a target method to cast an area of occuring Damage Bubbles.

 

 

 

The Pythagorean theorem REQUIRES two sides of a triangle.

 

You DONT HAVE that with the information you specified.  You provided a 30 degree apex and a height of the cone of 1000 meters.

 

The Law of Sines allows you to compute all angles and sides using TWO angles and one side.  (which you do have by cutting the cone in half)

You do understand the Pythagorean Theorem is not limited to one way of finding the sides of a triangle... right?

 

Having two angles and a side, or having two sides and one corner doesn't matter. You solve in accordance to the given values until you find all the sides :| The Pythagorean Theorem is all about finding relative sizes on a triangle. It doesn't tell you how to extract the values of those sides.

 

And this is why the Law of Cosines is part of the Theorem itself :|

 

Also, the reason I avoided math in the thread is this. People have different ways of solving for something, therefore threads get derailed.

 

We can agree to disagree on how we solve our math :|

 

But your radius at the end is still off :P

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pythagorean Theorem:  (for those that don't know it)

 

a^2 + b^2 = c^2  (for right triangles ONLY)

 

a, b, & c  ARE lengths of the legs of the triangle.  There are NO angles involved in the formula

 

 

It is derived from the Law of Cosines which is:

 

c^2 = a^2 + b^2 - 2ab cos C

 

With right triangles "2ab cos C" resolves to zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Pythagorean Theorem is all about finding relative sizes on a triangle. It doesn't tell you how to extract the values of those sides.

 

 

That's news to mathematicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pythagorean Theorem:  (for those that don't know it)

 

a^2 + b^2 = c^2  (for right triangles ONLY)

 

 

 

a, b, & c  ARE lengths of the legs of the triangle.  There are NO angles involved in the formula

 

It is derived from the Law of Cosines which is:

 

c^2 = a^2 + b^2 - 2ac cos C

 

With right triangles 2ac cos C resolves to zero.

 

That's news to mathematicians.

If you know only the Hypotenuse of the triangle, but also know two angles of the triangle, how will you manage to find the answer to a^2 + b^2 = c^2 ? :|

 

I guess by relying to the Law of Cosines, like the rest of us mortals :|

 

The formula you've provided is also just the equation behind the logic of the theorem, not what the theorem stands for, which is that there is always a corelating ratio of the sides of the triangle according to its angles :|

 

You seem to have no input on the topic, which is in the GAMEPLAY section of the forums. 

 

Also, it happens for people to make a mistake in math. Nobody questioned your honor here to get ballistic. :|

 

So, let's contain the discussion on the topic at hand :|

 

Are you fine with Cones of Fire, are you not? What's your input and what's that you would like to change? Is the Spotlighting method and the randomised Damage Bubble pattern limited by the Ammo Size / Heat Capacity fine? You know, the TOPIC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just like jerking your chain   :P

:| Yet you still have not provide any sort of feedback. You do understand we got a chance to make CvC interesting here mate?

 

If you can provide any info on the subject, please do :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly good except for a couple major points. First, mentioned above was the missing mechanic. If you can travel faster than kinetic projectiles, you shouldn't get any damage bubbles at all. Missiles should be the slowest, next would be "gun" guns, and last would be lasers, which you can't outrun.

 

Second, Ripper is right about the math, aside from the km^2 (don't forget to square the conversion factor). Although it seems you two may disagree on what angle we're talking about, the half angle or the full angle. If the 30 degrees is the full angle, then see Ripper's solution. If not, then this

 

Initial Cone of Fire Appex angle= 30 Degrees
Lnegth Distance from target = 1000 meters
Slant Distance = 1154.701 meters
Base Area Radius = 577.35 meters

is correct, minus the calculation for the base area.

 

In the 30 degree full angle case: area=226,000 m^2 or 0.226 km^2

In the 30 degree half angle case: area=1,005,000 m^2 or 1.005 km^2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly good except for a couple major points. First, mentioned above was the missing mechanic. If you can travel faster than kinetic projectiles, you shouldn't get any damage bubbles at all. Missiles should be the slowest, next would be "gun" guns, and last would be lasers, which you can't outrun.

 

 

Well, you see this in a wrong way.

 

Missiles have limited RANGE, they are not slow. It's just that in Close distances, you won't outrun them and they got a far larger damge bubble than average.

 

As of "missing" mechanic, you forget I'm talking of generating the Damage Bubbles around the enemy construct you locked on, this is to emulate leading the target by shooting ahead of them.

 

And yes, lasers are undodgable, but they love potency with distance.

 

 

Second, Ripper is right about the math, aside from the km^2 (don't forget to square the conversion factor). Although it seems you two may disagree on what angle we're talking about, the half angle or the full angle. If the 30 degrees is the full angle, then see Ripper's solution. If not, then this

is correct, minus the calculation for the base area.

 

In the 30 degree full angle case: area=226,000 m^2 or 0.226 km^2

In the 30 degree half angle case: area=1,005,000 m^2 or 1.005 km^2

I did notice I accidentally copied the values as of 30 Degree angle for the right triangle. It was meant to be 15, but that's what hpapens when you post a thread at 3 AM :|

 

Had it updated as of the values provided to reflect the 15 Degrees angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you see this in a wrong way.

 

Missiles have limited RANGE, they are not slow. It's just that in Close distances, you won't outrun them and they got a far larger damge bubble than average.

 

As of "missing" mechanic, you forget I'm talking of generating the Damage Bubbles around the enemy construct you locked on, this is to emulate leading the target by shooting ahead of them.

 

Missiles should be slow as a balance. They do lots of damage vs guns and lasers, so they should be slowed down. So yes, you should be able to outrun them.

 

If you want to talk about emulating leading a target, all the devs need to do is place the targeting reticle ahead of the moving target, instead of on top of it. Then in order to lock on you also need to put your aiming reticle in that area.

 

Missing could happen under different circumstances. One where the gunner doesn't place his reticle in the proper position. Another where the accuracy of the given situation is very low and the gunner misses his target. Another where the distribution of damage bubbles might place a bubble in an unoccupied space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missiles should be slow as a balance. They do lots of damage vs guns and lasers, so they should be slowed down. So yes, you should be able to outrun them.

 

If you want to talk about emulating leading a target, all the devs need to do is place the targeting reticle ahead of the moving target, instead of on top of it. Then in order to lock on you also need to put your aiming reticle in that area.

 

Missing could happen under different circumstances. One where the gunner doesn't place his reticle in the proper position. Another where the accuracy of the given situation is very low and the gunner misses his target. Another where the distribution of damage bubbles might place a bubble in an unoccupied space.

That cannot happen though, because at long distances the refresh rate is slower. The lateral movement and player skills along with weapon stats can emulate that leading while not having to actually lead the target.

 

 

As for missiles, you forget that missiles have fuel. That means that the missile mechanics can work in a much shorter cone area, and they are unavoidable, since they are smart missiles, they will guide themselves to the enemy.

 

And those missiles, should be made quite costly to use, as I mentioned. They should be that "finisher" in a way, or that "sure hit" on a smaller craft that is dodging your shots because it's moving a lot around and you can't put your damage bubbles on it, BUT, you got to go VERY near that craft.

 

Also, a jet-figher would have the option of "fire and forget" if they are going after disabling a battleship's main propulsion.

 

It's about range and accuracy and the utility of the weaponry involved. Lasers can be used to harrass an enemy's shield at ranges kinetic weaponry won't really be effective. Kinetic Weaponry is effective for the actual battle, and Missiles are tactical weaponry that are also expensive, but they have a very SHORT effective range. 

 

Heck, Missile Launchers may be able to lock-on Elements directly. It's called Fire & Forget, we have them in thse modern days. There could even be countermeasure deployed by Elements, like Flares or something, who knows.

 

 

And since I know it's coming, yes, ammunition will be a thing, you can run out of missiles, or rounds for your knietic weaponry. Lasers are preetty much tied to the ship's power core, or even Fission Material for ammunition for X-Ray Fission lasers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missiles should be slow as a balance. They do lots of damage vs guns and lasers, so they should be slowed down. So yes, you should be able to outrun them.

 

If you want to talk about emulating leading a target, all the devs need to do is place the targeting reticle ahead of the moving target, instead of on top of it. Then in order to lock on you also need to put your aiming reticle in that area.

 

Missing could happen under different circumstances. One where the gunner doesn't place his reticle in the proper position. Another where the accuracy of the given situation is very low and the gunner misses his target. Another where the distribution of damage bubbles might place a bubble in an unoccupied space.

I dont think outrunning missiles is going to be a thing. Devs have illustrated that hit/miss is going to be based on skills and armor and that no attack will exist in the universe it will simply be a graphic. My guess is balance to missiles will be the cost, maybe range(fuel) and possible something like an anti-missile turret. If you have one it will take energy but will increase the miss chance of missiles attacks by some amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...