Jump to content
Martok

Automated Weapons Systems

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, 0something0 said:

Also, how about orbital stations? Whats the difference between a space station and a ship? (The engines).  So, how do we define which space objects can get autoturrets? I'm not sure about this but doesnt space stations have their own cores? 

 

And how about CIWS turrets for shooting down missiles or bullets?

A spacestation is stationary, therefor either has a static core or is anchored (so it can't move anymore) - at that point those defenses work.

 

Missiles and bullets aren't simulated - such weapons can't exist as they have no targets to shoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lethys said:

Missiles and bullets aren't simulated - such weapons can't exist as they have no targets to shoot

True, but that doesn't mean such systems can't exist. They would simply operate in the terms of the combat system.

 

So at the moment based on what they seem to be planning, having anti-missile turrets would reduce the likelihood of missiles hitting the equipped target and play appropriate animations showing the missiles' destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DragonShadow said:

True, but that doesn't mean such systems can't exist. They would simply operate in the terms of the combat system.

 

So at the moment based on what they seem to be planning, having anti-missile turrets would reduce the likelihood of missiles hitting the equipped target and play appropriate animations showing the missiles' destruction.

Yeah, I should've elaborated a but more there. They won't exist in the manner of shooting actual missiles down as this is not what PvP will be like. 

 

But ofc you can have a bonus to "evade missile" when using such a defense system. I just don't want people to believe this isis a simulated shooter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 0something0 said:

what do you mean this isn't a shooter when it comes to ship to ship battles

SIMULATED shooter....like all the fps out there where bullets are simulated. That's not what DU is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 0something0 said:

what do you mean this isn't a shooter when it comes to ship to ship battles

Projectiles are not simulated, aka, you don't hit shoot and a 3D Mesh bullet spawns, which travels and if it collides it causes damage.

That's such a load DU servers would crash given the way they operate.

DU is built on a statistics model that adheres to action-prediction. What does that mean? You have statistical chances of shots causing daamge, which is a thing the Devs liked from EVE's model, which is, incidentally, REALISTIC. The very word "problem" in math, came from the greeks who used math to figure out how to increase a catapult's reach, problem meaning "before the thrown projectile". And ships require firing solutions before any shots, modern day battleships fight at 30Km distance, not 100 meters like in Star Shitizen.

 

[Following Example uses simple nubmers to demonstrate, not to be taken on face value]


So, if your ship orbited my ship at 62.84 Km distance, and I start orbitting you as well at that distance and we both orbit at an angular velocity of 174.5 meters per second, and then we both start shooting at each other, what would go down?

Well, this is where weapon tracking takes place. I would use Radians at this point, but I don't think you guys would understand shit, so let's keep it in degree for simplicitiy's sake. Also, Transversals, we'll get to them later.

Weapons have mass that is emulated via "weapon tracking" the speed at which your turrets turn to face the enemy, which for your ship is 1 degree per second (really big ships, they take forever to turn) and my turrets got 0.5 degrees of turn.

At 62.84 Km range of orbit, the degree of your ship's guns trackign equates to a target moving at 174.5 meters per seconds,. You may think "yey, so i hit you?"

No. We both both move at 174.5 meters per second, yes ,your speed throws off YOUR aim as well. My ship has it worse, it's only 1/4 of the total pssed we boh have, so I have a 25% tracking efficiency on you.

Now, the almighty transversals., What are they? The distance between two points. What does that mean?

Your guns have statistics, like "Optimal Range" (the range in which your guns deal optimal damage, no weaknened stae due to inertia). LEt's say your guns are only 30Km in Optimal Range, with a falloff range of damage (half damage range) of 60 Km. My guns have though 60 km Optimal (slower guns to track, means b igger).

So, in an engagement, your guns, even if they "land" shots on me, you deal Falloff Damage (50% damage at its max reach) and then, due to my speed exceeding your tracking sped by 50%, you deal another 50% less damge that I resist - which damage is then mitigated by armor plating resistances or shield resistances or whatever goes on.

But my guns, deal 100% damage, but at 25% tracking efficiecny, they are on the point of barely scratching you, but when they do land, they do hurt.

What changes the battle? Our ships' tanking capability. You CAN make a ship that goes so fast, no tracking is able to keep up with it ,with any short landign dealing very little damge - if not missing entirely.

That's DU's idea of the hit calculations. They explained that on Project Update #21 on Kickstarter.

Is this system "action packed" ??? Yes it is. It's like actual ship warfare, with he mentality of "Hurry up and Wait". Enemy fleet is focusing your ship? GET AL OT OF SPEED in ON DIRECTION. Screw damage, your job is to survive their next breif seconds of focus fire. Then chill out, absorb the battlefield, adapt to the situation.

As for missiles, EVE's missile combat works by "(your ship's signature / Missile Explosion size) * missile explosion time" to determine damge.

IF your ship's signature is only 100 meters, but the explosion of the missile hitting it is 1000 meters (per second) with an explosino lasting 2 second, it means your ship will take 20% damage from the missile (before mitigations).

 

No, smaller missiles can't cause "more damage" to bigger targets, it's capped to 100% damage for the missiles. so, use the proper missile for the proper ship size.


And that CAN work for DU. Missile "paints" an area, then missile damage is "distributed" more the more voxels it affects on its target paint area.


Which more or less means, you won't be one-shotted by some Cruise Missile fired at your frigate - or you might be, depends on the tanking of your frigate. if it's made out of Plastic, it will shatter under any damage :P

 

Will this be the combat model of DU 1:1 ratio? Not neccessarily, but it is something that's lightweight on the server and it reinforces the tactical gameplay ship warfare involves. But NQ has demonstrated so far they do got ship cross-sections (signature radius) in the building mode of a ship and is visible on the Dev Diaries, just saying.

 

 

On 28/10/2017 at 3:14 AM, DragonShadow said:

True, but that doesn't mean such systems can't exist. They would simply operate in the terms of the combat system.

 

So at the moment based on what they seem to be planning, having anti-missile turrets would reduce the likelihood of missiles hitting the equipped target and play appropriate animations showing the missiles' destruction.


Point Defenses, can work with the EVE model of missiles. When a missile is fired, it's just a "ticking bomb" on the server side until your ship registers damage. In EVE, you can fire an Anti-Missile...err, Missile, which essentially "dispells" that Time-Bomb effect - and provides a cool explosion on the particle effect as it flies.

Having turrets do that work is... not very possible though. Turrets able to hit missiles, means they can hit ships at 300000 Km range :P

So, Point Defense missiles - yes, they are indeed a good idea :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good day everybody,

First of all I would like to say that I recently discovered Dual Universe but was fascinated from the beginning with NQ's vision - a game in which EVERYONE can do what HE wants!
Now I read the comments here and lose my hopes of a game without limits :(
A game in which everyone can do what he wants, should not have the condition of having a crew. That should not be misunderstood. I know that NQ also wants players to team up and do great things and I think that's a great thing but for me that does not mean that every player needs a crew to experience the full potential of this game !!
I, for example, have imagined joining an organization and like to play with the members of this organization but I do not want to be able to cooperate with other players every time I am online in order to play or steer and defend my ship , Sometimes I just want to switch off and do my thing and then I would like to have the opportunity to do it alone! And I think others also like to play alone. Which does not mean that these players do not belong to a group ...
The idea that a ship with many weapon systems can not be fully controlled by a single player is absolute nonsense!

In Dual Universe we are all part of a high-tech society. A society that is able to travel and populate star systems.
So why should not this society, or at least some with the necessary skills, be able to create a ship that has 100 weapons systems, all of which can be controlled by one person? Of course it is difficult for a person to handle but it would be a shame if this possibility does not even exist!
And for those who say that a group is always better than a single person, they are seriously mistaken. Groups have many advantages but also have disadvantages. A single person only has to take care of himself and any mistake made can only be traced back to himself. This is not the case with a group. Here I have read some comments in which it is said that it would be much better if a ship with all its weapons, etc. can only be used by several people. I see a lot of big problems and many have been mentioned here as, for example, if a player with an important role in the crew is not online the ship may not be fit for Action.

Another reason that I think was not mentioned yet is this:
Not every player will have friends with whom he starts to play Dual Universe, so anyone who starts playing without friends will NEED to seek a crew. I do not think everyone wants to put together a crew. A motley crew really only brings disadvantages. And finding a crew to work with is not easy and takes a lot of time.
Therefore, it must be the case that even large ships with complex systems can be handled by a PLAYER using LUA.
Another possibility that flew through my mind is the following:
If the Unit Core is brought into play in small variations so that you can build droids, it is possible that a single player could use a big ship with all its features. To do this, he would need to set only the droids through the LUA so that they activate the weapons, shields, etc. You can program the weapons, shields and whatever else you can with LUA beforehand, so that these elements follow very simple commands.
An example where you can see that in full glory is Star Wars.
I think droids would be an awesome Extension.

 

 

As a final word, I just want to say please remember that this should be a game in which everyone, whether alone or in the group should be able to do anything.
It should be a game without limits so be so nice and do not set yourself the Limits.

 

 

https://youtu.be/4Vrf50dZrv4?t=98 at Minute 1:38 the devs said u can attach severel Elements like weapons, doors etc. to a Control pad! So there is not one Person = one weapon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game play design decisions trump all "logical arguments" as to why things should be a certain way.

 

If NQ don't want a single player to control multiple turrets on a ship, they'll simply design the game in such a way that it becomes impossible. If players find "workarounds", NQ will patch them out.

 

We have no idea at this point how NQ will enforce the one-player-per-weapon design, or whether that will apply to turrets only. Fixed forward-facing weapons may or may not be subject to that rule, because if you can only fire at what's in front of you, combat becomes a lot more tricky.

 

IIRC, all weapons in EVE are turreted, i.e. the direction your ship is facing is not important for firing solutions, and target locking doesn't require keeping a reticle on a target (you simply select the target from a menu and initiate locking).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NanoDot said:

Game play design decisions trump all "logical arguments" as to why things should be a certain way.

 

If NQ don't want a single player to control multiple turrets on a ship, they'll simply design the game in such a way that it becomes impossible. If players find "workarounds", NQ will patch them out.

Of course you are right with what you say. If NQ decides that a player can not control multiple weapons, then that's the case.
However, we are here in the forum to discuss it so developers can see what the community wants.
For my part, I am absolutely in favor of a player being able to control several weapons. I'm not talking about a single player being able to control a huge warship in full. Nevertheless, even a single player should have the opportunity to build a remarkable ship.

 

3 hours ago, NanoDot said:

We have no idea at this point how NQ will enforce the one-player-per-weapon design, or whether that will apply to turrets only. Fixed forward-facing weapons may or may not be subject to that rule, because if you can only fire at what's in front of you, combat becomes a lot more tricky.

 

IIRC, all weapons in EVE are turreted, i.e. the direction your ship is facing is not important for firing solutions, and target locking doesn't require keeping a reticle on a target (you simply select the target from a menu and initiate locking).

Furthermore, I would not find it good if there are only dull forward weapons that can only hit what is in front of you.
It would be much more exciting (and more realistic) when there are weapons systems that are also pivotable in all directions. Fixed weapon systems are also great for hunters and similar, but swivel weapon systems bring a lot more variations into play that will ultimately affect the design of the ships.

 

6 hours ago, 0something0 said:

I have in mind a concept ui for a balanced system that allows for multiple turrets per person that basically forces micromanagement of turret subsystems.

 

I havent been able to find time to work on it though.

Balance is obviously an important point. If you have time to work out your idea, I'm curious to know more about it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"scripted defenses only work when you are close enough for them to work"

Now I don't know a whole lot about scripting, but could it (talking about automated weapons systems in general as well) simply run when a player is near it? Similar to how redstone machines in minecraft will only operate in loaded chunks? Then there wouldn't need to be a worry for no defence when offline as the raiders and griefers themselves will trigger the defences by just being in the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...