Jump to content
Grizzord

Combat Style!

Recommended Posts

So from what has been announced, they said that they plan and an eve online target then fire system for construct battle. i for one was thinking how this could be a detriment to smaller smuggler ships who would gain an advantage by flying in circles around larger ships and being able to fire "projectile" weapons such as plasma bolts aka starwars. now the issue that they have stated with this is the projectiles would lag the servers. however, if you coded in a hard coded projectile life cycle ergo 5 seconds it would cause minimal the server lag. it could also create new jobs on larger craft. you could have dozens of gunner seats on large battleships and even on smaller fighters. now what i suggest is kind of a combo of what i said and what they have. i suggest that they have both lock on style weapons that are more effective damage wise and free fire weapons that do smaller amounts of damage. what do you guys think????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhm....even If it's Lock and fire as in eve, you still need ammo. And people toan the turrets.

This system just means that bullets/lasers are Not simulated (like FPS), but hit chance and dmg are calculated, depending on different stats like: your ingame skills, your velocity, your radial Velocity, turret tracking, turret properties, the enemie's velocity and vector, hull armor, shields, ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What lethys said is accurate in terms of how it works, and also in a large space battle even a small timer on despawning projectiles could cause server lag, and would create lots more stress on the node server architecture of having to simulate bullets and check for impacts rather than something being told that it has been impacted. Also, you will need people to man most turrets on ships anyways as it has been said AI targeting will have a drawback such as vastly reduced damage on a per turret basis. Also, if they had both but projectiles had small damage outputs, it would be near pointless for any ship to use them as lock and fire chance to hit will be based on what a projectile chance to hit would be affected by, as lethys said above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Grizzord said:

So from what has been announced, they said that they plan and an eve online target then fire system for construct battle. i for one was thinking how this could be a detriment to smaller smuggler ships who would gain an advantage by flying in circles around larger ships and being able to fire "projectile" weapons such as plasma bolts aka starwars. now the issue that they have stated with this is the projectiles would lag the servers. however, if you coded in a hard coded projectile life cycle ergo 5 seconds it would cause minimal the server lag. it could also create new jobs on larger craft. you could have dozens of gunner seats on large battleships and even on smaller fighters. now what i suggest is kind of a combo of what i said and what they have. i suggest that they have both lock on style weapons that are more effective damage wise and free fire weapons that do smaller amounts of damage. what do you guys think????

Hi there.

Let's go through the logistics of spawned projectiles.

Any, and all projectiles, spawned in any and all video games, have a "lifespan" as you put it, i nthe form of "render distance". From Gallaga, to Space Invaders, to MEcha Unicorn XL, all these games spawn projectiles, that despawn once they reach out of the screen (usually, the rule of thumb is 50% screen excess is where the bullet despawns).

Every - and all - bullet spawns, are tracked by the server, they are ,for all itnents and purposes, termporay "characters" the server spawns and flies in one motion, given speed and "figurative" bullet weight, as well as the G of the engien it's coded in. That means, for every and each bullet spawn, the server has to "fly" the bullet. You may say "but only x gun uses them", thatr's irrelevant, 100 people ,firting 5 rounds a second, means the serfver has to spawn 500 bullet entities and fly them to a target and then some more, since it has to verify the bullet collided. That's called a resource hog and it's why Battlefield as a series is bottlenecked to 33 updateqs per second fro mthe server and up to 64 people at once. But let's no discuss Netcode just yet, that can come in later.

As for the cobmat system, it's not 1:1 EVE's model.

It is lock-on as Lock-on Elder Scrolls Online is. EVE is built as such, cause it was coded in 1999-2001. They already explaien yo ulock the "mining bubbles" to do damge with weapons - or at least, that's their vision for AvA combat.
 

EVE Online has Blasters (plasma rapid fire railguns),. And it also has ships going around a target so fast, they can't be hit - which is why those ships have rapid fire railguns  that work only in close range, since they don't have enoguh projectile speed to reach long range targets in time.

 

Now, as for NQ';s ways of netcoding. Their model is essentially ,action prediction.

Your gun has a set of quantified data, For example, the "muzzle velocity" is expressed as "Optimal Range",m aka, the range in within your bullet will deal maximum damage (before enemy mitigation). That value can be increased by skill training (pasisive clock on upgrades, you sequence on your own). So, a top-level Gunner, has 5/5 Gunnery, and 5/5 Projectile Projections, giving them a net bonus of +50% optimal range (number is placeholder not finite value, nothign has been announced ass of the raw numbers). Further more, Certain weapon expertise can provide bonus to your damage itself. After that, AMMUNINIOT type can increase your optimal range, by making the bulelt lighter. What does lighter bullet mean for railguns? Less damage but you can fire fro ma range the enemy can't even hit you.
 

See, ship combat is not about "PRO MLG NO SCOPE" IRL, it's about  baiting the enemy, int oa maneuver they can't veer out of and then you pepper them with superioror firepower.

That involves math. In EVE, there is a cardinal rule "never Approach directly", meaning ,enver go i na straight line to oyur target, always approach with an angle. Why? Cause if yo uare going in a B-line towards the enmy, they can just blow you to bits, sicne yo udon't move left or right to them, you can be zero'd in and destroyed easily.  Same idea apples in DU's model.

A turret on a ship, takes time to turn, and that's how EVE quantifies "tracking", aka, "how much your guns can keep up with the target". Again, training can icnrease the tracking of a gun, hence a trained in Gunnery player will be favoured for a gunner position over a non-gunner.

 

And now, how do you quantify defenses? If a ship was to move at a certain accelration, ti has a certain momentum. That momentum, means that if a bullet was to hit you, the ship will push it away ,as the bulelt connects (depending on the bullet's angle). That is quantified in EVE (and probably DU) by comparing Angular Velocity of a target, to your guns' Tracking - your angles of trackin ,versus their angles of traversing space. Depending on the percante of V-Angular/Tracking you get a certain percentage of damage out of your turets. Notice, the further your guns can easily hit, the less tracking you need to track a target. I.e. if you see a jet plane in the sky, you can easily point at it with your finger and keep track of it, but if the jet plane was flying low and at full speed, - well, you'd be deaf - you'd not be able to jeep yup with the plane's speed to point at it. 

 

This kind of model is favourable for DU's netcode, cause it takes advantage of te concurrent calculations he server does. I.e. you may be seeing our target at 1 second dealy cause of how the server partition works, but the SERVER sees you and the other person at the same time. So, you taking a shot at them, is exactly as if you were takin a shot at them at real-time, using the above mathematical means of expressing hit chance and other things. This will also produce the effect of "bulelt travelling unti lti hits" by taking a moment before the hit confirmation comes back visually, but that's just something I'd like them to a least try and work at if it's not already how their rendering works.


And that's where your request lays. You CAN fly around a target at high speeds in EVE (and obviously, since it's a similar model of math emulated combat), so much so that their guns can't even keep up with you to hit you, while you pepper them with pew pew, but also, you got to understand that if you attack a bigger ship, they will probably have far more shield strength than you - and they got more fuel than you, so they can outlast you. This is not Star Citzien ,where Super Hornets are able to solo bigger ships, cause "I paid 400 dollarunions for that Super Hornet, I should be able to wreck anything less than 400 Dollarunions, and even above 400 Dollarunions".

 

Physics based combat is fun and all but it can be emulated just fine with mathematics and lock-on, it doesn't need to be simulated. And for the scope DU goes for, it's a good and validated compromise. I'd like an ESO-style lock-on system with 100 times the numbers of people on the screen that ESO can pull off, than 1/3 of the numbers ESO can pull off and fancy bullet spawns.


P.S: Turrets in DU demand players to use them ,that's something NQ has made explicitely clear mayn times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope that the combat in DU is at least fluent and not slowed down like in eve online....

 

netcode and bullets: not every game spawns physically bullets, some use a hit scan system (counter strike for example), where you shoot with laser pointers effectively.

also a higher server update rate (60<->30 per seconds) doesn’t automatically means a shorter lag (=time between you press fire and the shot is registered by the server).

there is a Korean ego-shooter with only 30 Server updates per Seconds but a shorter lag then most games with 60 updates per second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Takao said:

I just hope that the combat in DU is at least fluent and not slowed down like in eve online....

 

netcode and bullets: not every game spawns physically bullets, some use a hit scan system (counter strike for example), where you shoot with laser pointers effectively.

also a higher server update rate (60<->30 per seconds) doesn’t automatically means a shorter lag (=time between you press fire and the shot is registered by the server).

there is a Korean ego-shooter with only 30 Server updates per Seconds but a shorter lag then most games with 60 updates per second.

Oh , never said the rate of updates reduces latent...er, latency.

The problem with any korean game's netcode, is that they use the advanced Telecom infrastructure found only in Korea .
It's the same thing with gamesl ike Tera, Blade & Soul(yeah, let's not talk about it) and Black Desert Online. They are all built on working with that certrain infrastructure, which is why Porting the Korean client into worldwide release is not very easy, since the netcode needs adapting.

As for the hitscan, sure, but the OP spoke of spawning projectiles. While hitscan COULD work for DU, it would not work with the way they partition the game world. Hitscans and probabilities mix as well as peanut butter and Budweiser.


And yeah, Ti-Di (time dilation) from EVE is not present in DU, but they do have demonstrated their take on this, with the delayed radiant updates from one partition on the server to another, so, your client can easily figure out what's happening ,by having a "streamed" array of actions and vectors to transition player models and ships on the screen. EVE's CSP model of Netcoding, is demanding Ti-Di, so the sequence of the netcode can service everyone equally.

If EVE deals with load in "time", DU deals with it in "space" via its partitioning of the server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@korean netcode: well, yes and no. Good netcode will improve online experience everywhere. The test was done not on Korean servers, but on American (YouTube Channel „battle nonsense“).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Takao said:

@korean netcode: well, yes and no. Good netcode will improve online experience everywhere. The test was done not on Korean servers, but on American (YouTube Channel „battle nonsense“).

 

I took the time to look up the Black Squad video he made (funny enough, I have seen his channel i nthe past).

Black Squad uses AWS servers - like DU does currently - to host the sessions. DU uses those servers to connect player locally, and the Actor Model takes care of the calculations. Black Squad's netcode, is not anything revolutionary, it's a dedicated server that can change location within the AWS cloud. Cool, but DU has Actor Model. Actor Model is simply what I described many times.


I may live in Northern Kekistan, and you may live in Southern Ponyville, we both connect to different servers on AWS' cloud, but in-ghame, we seem to be standing on the same patch of land. That'sActor Model for you.

However, Black Squad has NO innovative features, other than hosting games on a cloud server, thus keeping the distance between players at a relative minimum. It's using a 30hz update rate.

EVE runs at like 1hz. Literally, 1 update per second. But since they use CSP a lot, they have to actually slow down to verify the authoritatitive of the client, thus it goes even lower than that, the more people are on on a node. For PvP, it's great, everyone palys on the ssme latency, you can't claim "omg, lag" in EVE, that's the game where EVERYONE plays on the same footing.

I can't say for certain - not yet anyway - but DU can work at 4 hz probably (250ms), depending on the servers NQ rents from aWS (there are lots of different machines in AWS' clouid, from 400 USD rent to some really "ouch" prices). Thing is, 4Hz is not enough for shooting mechanics, not when the average gun fires at 5 rounds per second..

You are in one partition, and shoot at me on another partition, then the server updates both of us on damage status, but visually ,we get updated with a delay on me shooting you and me getting a hit marker, from partition to partition. But this requires a predetermined set within the action prediction the server does to make the updates happen. You just can't have bullets migrating partitions through the server, it would just tank the mainframe's performance - simialr to how an EVE node cracks under a lot of weight and hence why Ti-Di exists to begin with.

 

Also  now you see why people with actual education on these scoff at Star Citizen's "cloud based servers". 240ms delay works for DU's lockl-and-fire, not for SC's balls to the wall shooter with spawned bullets.


It's important to understand though, Actor Model has not been widely used for games before - not at this scale DU goes for. This is why me - as well as others - are on board with DU from the start. The game itself is an afterthought, we want to see this technical marvel come alive.

If DU succeeds, maybe games will start evolving and not utilise a piece of shit Peer-2-Peer host on every game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

However, Black Squad has NO innovative features, other than hosting games on a cloud server, thus keeping the distance between players at a relative minimum. It's using a 30hz update rate.

Who sad their net code is revolutionary?

Fact is: their net code works better than most other net codes, because they achieve a very low latency by letting clients sent updates to the server once every frame and not on a fixed number or to a maxim at which the servers itself sends updates to the clients.

 

1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Also  now you see why people with actual education on these scoff at Star Citizen's "cloud based servers". 240ms delay works for DU's lockl-and-fire, not for SC's balls to the wall shooter with spawned bullets.

Yes, I'm still wondering how they want to manage bigger battles or at what ping you are playing these.

They may have a persistent universe, but they have different servers, like in WoW.

 

1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

If DU succeeds, maybe games will start evolving and not utilise a piece of shit Peer-2-Peer host on every game.

Peer-2-peer means that you don't have a server which runs the game / session, but instead the clients connect to each other directly.

Basically every online shooter does not use P2P. I know only of Destiny 2 that uses P2P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Takao said:

 

Who sad their net code is revolutionary?

Fact is: their net code works better than most other net codes, because they achieve a very low latency by letting clients sent updates to the server once every frame and not on a fixed number or to a maxim at which the servers itself sends updates to the clients.

 

Yes, I'm still wondering how they want to manage bigger battles or at what ping you are playing these.

They may have a persistent universe, but they have different servers, like in WoW.

 

Peer-2-peer means that you don't have a server which runs the game / session, but instead the clients connect to each other directly.

Basically every online shooter does not use P2P. I know only of Destiny 2 that uses P2P.

CoD used P2P for the last 14 years or however long it's going for.

It's just that bad. And Destiny is supposedly an "MMO". Yeah, MMO  built on P2P, lol.

As for Star Citizen ,the last thing I recall is that they worked mon makin each ship handle as an isntance, so, a local battle can have up to 64 ships, with upto 64 people in each ship, and use the ship as a parent entity for updates to everyone on board.

Problem with that, is, you guessed it, 63 ship fleets, vs 1 guy who cant'; call for backup. Lord Mandalore on yoitube have a good video on the whole game with a very good point on SC's instancing extravaganza.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Problem with that, is, you guessed it, 63 ship fleets, vs 1 guy who cant'; call for backup. Lord Mandalore on yoitube have a good video on the whole game with a very good point on SC's instancing extravaganza.

Ähm, can you make a 64 ship fleet?

Wouldn't that mean that a 63 ship fleet is effectively unbeatable, as long as the 1 enemy ship isn't capable of destroying either all 63 ship or 1, so that you can trade 1:1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Takao said:

Ähm, can you make a 64 ship fleet?

Wouldn't that mean that a 63 ship fleet is effectively unbeatable, as long as the 1 enemy ship isn't capable of destroying either all 63 ship or 1, so that you can trade 1:1?

You tell me. That's what people point to as a flaud in the whole system.
 But their fanbase will just say"nah, it's gonna be fiiiiiiiine, they will amke 1000000000 ships fill i non place.. Also, the NPc population wil lbe 10:1. Yes, for every player, 10 NPCs will be in the game...".

It's not an MMO if it's Battlefield sized PvP.

It's not an MMO if it has matchmaking for essentially open world PvP.

In general, it's a cluster-F in progress the whole thing. Their Alpha 3.0 was suppsoeed to come out last year, o November, now it's pushed till Kingdom Cometh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Released game example - Elite: Dangerous ran into instance-stuffing as well. People could, and would, abuse the (low) instancing limits to get safe (or overwhelming) fleets in Open for PVP, and for blocking reinforcements.
I easily can see it being a problem for SC as well, no matter how hard the fanboys deny even the possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t played star citizens and currently I have no interest in doing so. I am watching their bug smashers series and had watched a few of their developer videos.

Their techniques are really impressive:

 - Algorithmen for generating whole cities, including the buildings interiours

 - Using custom weighted normals for all 3D models (no sharp edges). Also they are not the first to do so.

 - Generally using tiled textures and decals for details. As a player you see the result as lower gpu and hard drive requirements, for them it reduces the time for making ships quite drastically.

 

One solution for the fleet problem would be to cap the fleet size at half the maximum the system can handle.

 

Whats the definition of an mmo?

If the economy is persistent, you could meet every person in game, then wouldn’t it be a mmo?

 

But in general they have promised a lot and couldn’t deliver that much so far. Let’s see how this will turn out.

They should have just created the single player / coop campaign first, and then after that started on the whole mmo thing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SC is offtopic ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I'm glad DU goes for a mathematical solution and doesn't count on real player skills to hit someone. That's the right approach right there: tell your fanbase your goal (massive MMO) and tell them what you CAN'T do (simulated bullets, realistic physics,...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lethys said:

SC is offtopic ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I'm glad DU goes for a mathematical solution and doesn't count on real player skills to hit someone. That's the right approach right there: tell your fanbase your goal (massive MMO) and tell them what you CAN'T do (simulated bullets, realistic physics,...)

I mean, they "could" do bullet physics, just not in this current iteration of processor speeds - or the next decade in general :P .

Give Intel a decade, those guys will come out with 20 Ghz commercial CPUs with 32 cores each.

That or a toaster. One of the two.

At that point, maybe DU can ditch the hit-chance, but currently? Not a chance, the frequency for updates is just not enough for a mainframe to spare enough processing prowess for spawned bullets.


The real good thing about DU, is that it doesn't lock out people with not the best internet speeds - and given the recent clusterflak in the US, I bet the problem will become apparent with most games.

DU is just no reliant on low latencies, that's the smart move imho.

Share this post


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

I haven’t played star citizens and currently I have no interest in doing so. I am watching their bug smashers series and had watched a few of their developer videos.

Their techniques are really impressive:

 - Algorithmen for generating whole cities, including the buildings interiours

 - Using custom weighted normals for all 3D models (no sharp edges). Also they are not the first to do so.

 - Generally using tiled textures and decals for details. As a player you see the result as lower gpu and hard drive requirements, for them it reduces the time for making ships quite drastically.

 

One solution for the fleet problem would be to cap the fleet size at half the maximum the system can handle.

 

Whats the definition of an mmo?

If the economy is persistent, you could meet every person in game, then wouldn’t it be a mmo?

 

But in general they have promised a lot and couldn’t deliver that much so far. Let’s see how this will turn out.

They should have just created the single player / coop campaign first, and then after that started on the whole mmo thing...

Not to be blunt, their algorithms are not "impressive". The same technique with cell-population can be achieved by anyone who is 3rd Semester at CSD - and 3D modelling skyscrappers can be achieved on tumblr or pinterest. 

Their only real innovation is their shaderwork. And Shaders - no disrespect to any graphics specialist - are just a matter of time investment in developement.

Decima Engine, the one Kojima uses for his next trip into early dementia, is a pwoerful engine ,with 10x the shaderwork that Lumberyard has. It even has floating hair now, after Kojima totally not stole source code from Fox Engine and added it to Decima's.

Wanna bet after Death Stranding comes out Star Citizen will move to Decima engine? Deep down, you know it.

It's not really that impressive when you KNOW what's behind the magic trick they play. It's just they try to make a skyscrapper out of duct-tape and hype. That's not how this works. 

NQ built the netcode framework first. That's the game's core. Netcode. That's what DU lives and dies by. Combat can be tuned, building can be tuned, RP can be enriched, and customisation can be all about Hello Kitty stickers (hopefully). But broken Netcode means broken experience.

Do not confuse an expensive toy with a good toy, Star Citizen is to video games what iPhone X is to smartphones. Just hype.

And DU is like the first Iphone. Groundbreaking shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Hi there.

Let's go through the logistics of spawned projectiles.

Any, and all projectiles, spawned in any and all video games, have a "lifespan" as you put it, i nthe form of "render distance". From Gallaga, to Space Invaders, to MEcha Unicorn XL, all these games spawn projectiles, that despawn once they reach out of the screen (usually, the rule of thumb is 50% screen excess is where the bullet despawns).

Every - and all - bullet spawns, are tracked by the server, they are ,for all itnents and purposes, termporay "characters" the server spawns and flies in one motion, given speed and "figurative" bullet weight, as well as the G of the engien it's coded in. That means, for every and each bullet spawn, the server has to "fly" the bullet. You may say "but only x gun uses them", thatr's irrelevant, 100 people ,firting 5 rounds a second, means the serfver has to spawn 500 bullet entities and fly them to a target and then some more, since it has to verify the bullet collided. That's called a resource hog and it's why Battlefield as a series is bottlenecked to 33 updateqs per second fro mthe server and up to 64 people at once. But let's no discuss Netcode just yet, that can come in later.

As for the cobmat system, it's not 1:1 EVE's model.

It is lock-on as Lock-on Elder Scrolls Online is. EVE is built as such, cause it was coded in 1999-2001. They already explaien yo ulock the "mining bubbles" to do damge with weapons - or at least, that's their vision for AvA combat.
 

EVE Online has Blasters (plasma rapid fire railguns),. And it also has ships going around a target so fast, they can't be hit - which is why those ships have rapid fire railguns  that work only in close range, since they don't have enoguh projectile speed to reach long range targets in time.

 

Now, as for NQ';s ways of netcoding. Their model is essentially ,action prediction.

Your gun has a set of quantified data, For example, the "muzzle velocity" is expressed as "Optimal Range",m aka, the range in within your bullet will deal maximum damage (before enemy mitigation). That value can be increased by skill training (pasisive clock on upgrades, you sequence on your own). So, a top-level Gunner, has 5/5 Gunnery, and 5/5 Projectile Projections, giving them a net bonus of +50% optimal range (number is placeholder not finite value, nothign has been announced ass of the raw numbers). Further more, Certain weapon expertise can provide bonus to your damage itself. After that, AMMUNINIOT type can increase your optimal range, by making the bulelt lighter. What does lighter bullet mean for railguns? Less damage but you can fire fro ma range the enemy can't even hit you.
 

See, ship combat is not about "PRO MLG NO SCOPE" IRL, it's about  baiting the enemy, int oa maneuver they can't veer out of and then you pepper them with superioror firepower.

That involves math. In EVE, there is a cardinal rule "never Approach directly", meaning ,enver go i na straight line to oyur target, always approach with an angle. Why? Cause if yo uare going in a B-line towards the enmy, they can just blow you to bits, sicne yo udon't move left or right to them, you can be zero'd in and destroyed easily.  Same idea apples in DU's model.

A turret on a ship, takes time to turn, and that's how EVE quantifies "tracking", aka, "how much your guns can keep up with the target". Again, training can icnrease the tracking of a gun, hence a trained in Gunnery player will be favoured for a gunner position over a non-gunner.

 

And now, how do you quantify defenses? If a ship was to move at a certain accelration, ti has a certain momentum. That momentum, means that if a bullet was to hit you, the ship will push it away ,as the bulelt connects (depending on the bullet's angle). That is quantified in EVE (and probably DU) by comparing Angular Velocity of a target, to your guns' Tracking - your angles of trackin ,versus their angles of traversing space. Depending on the percante of V-Angular/Tracking you get a certain percentage of damage out of your turets. Notice, the further your guns can easily hit, the less tracking you need to track a target. I.e. if you see a jet plane in the sky, you can easily point at it with your finger and keep track of it, but if the jet plane was flying low and at full speed, - well, you'd be deaf - you'd not be able to jeep yup with the plane's speed to point at it. 

 

This kind of model is favourable for DU's netcode, cause it takes advantage of te concurrent calculations he server does. I.e. you may be seeing our target at 1 second dealy cause of how the server partition works, but the SERVER sees you and the other person at the same time. So, you taking a shot at them, is exactly as if you were takin a shot at them at real-time, using the above mathematical means of expressing hit chance and other things. This will also produce the effect of "bulelt travelling unti lti hits" by taking a moment before the hit confirmation comes back visually, but that's just something I'd like them to a least try and work at if it's not already how their rendering works.


And that's where your request lays. You CAN fly around a target at high speeds in EVE (and obviously, since it's a similar model of math emulated combat), so much so that their guns can't even keep up with you to hit you, while you pepper them with pew pew, but also, you got to understand that if you attack a bigger ship, they will probably have far more shield strength than you - and they got more fuel than you, so they can outlast you. This is not Star Citzien ,where Super Hornets are able to solo bigger ships, cause "I paid 400 dollarunions for that Super Hornet, I should be able to wreck anything less than 400 Dollarunions, and even above 400 Dollarunions".

 

Physics based combat is fun and all but it can be emulated just fine with mathematics and lock-on, it doesn't need to be simulated. And for the scope DU goes for, it's a good and validated compromise. I'd like an ESO-style lock-on system with 100 times the numbers of people on the screen that ESO can pull off, than 1/3 of the numbers ESO can pull off and fancy bullet spawns.


P.S: Turrets in DU demand players to use them ,that's something NQ has made explicitely clear mayn times.

Thank you for the explanation it was perfectly laid out for me. and i now that i understand better i can rest easier. one last question though.. will there be front facing turrets for single maned ships?? i assume so but just a question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Grizzord said:

Thank you for the explanation it was perfectly laid out for me. and i now that i understand better i can rest easier. one last question though.. will there be front facing turrets for single maned ships?? i assume so but just a question.

Don't know that. I guess you mean things like "nose guns" for fighters? In that case, yeah, probably and depending on how NQ structures the in-game scripts, it may be possible to make a "solo flying frigate" for example that handlesl ike a fighter jet in space. But that is just speculation for now..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2017 at 11:46 PM, Grizzord said:

...one last question though.. will there be front facing turrets for single maned ships?? i assume so but just a question.

As Twerk said, how weapons actually work has not been discussed.  What we can safely assume is that the players will be able to place the various weapons on their constructs (ships/buildings) as they see fit. So "front facing" will definitely be included in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe FPS (outside of a construct) combat should not have a targeting system to be able to shoot at someone. This ruins skill and makes everything based off of who has the better weapon and shield. Skill is what make's games pvp more interesting and keeps the big guys from completely destroying the little guys. For example, I have a T1 weapon and I go up against a T3 weapon user, with targeting system I would not stand a chance in hell in beating the T3, but if I am able to maneuver, dodge, find cover, and kite this T3 person I might stand a chance. Using personal skill would be way more interactive and fun combat than a targeting system.  FPS hand held weapons should be free fire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, tactics = closer to moment to moment aka visceral reaction stimulation (skill). Strategy = closer to planning, designing, context of making the various decisions in an encounter and executing a strategy over a longer period of time, maybe involving numerous defeats and deaths but ultimately "winning the war".

 

How much "tactics" we get out of combat in DU, I see this as "nice to have" but far from essential: It's a BIG UNIVERSE = a numbers game ultimately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As scales goes up weapons and pvp become more and more of a number game, however I think as single person combat goes I agree with xWolkx, it should be more skill based. the Devs have left this open as on option and I hope it gets carried through. I also think that smaller craft and weapons should also be somewhat skill based and numbers based. skill will make it so that as a small quick craft you have different tactical advantages over a large slow craft. 

 

I am not sure how craft speed etc... will effect weapons and battle outcomes but I hope it does have an effect. 

 

Maybe the lock on for turrets will have to be manually aimed and locked on or something of that sort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's the idea about having the game client calciulating a number, which is represent the theoretical average hitting rate based on local data (for a short time), which could affect the target hitting chance in a positiv or a negativ way. So that a gunner can have at least a little bit a FPS experience.

 

Another idea is that a gunner has the ability to controll the turrets facing direction (while not shooting) so you can position it for somewhat complicated maneuver to use a slow turning turret more efficient.

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...