Jump to content
SonEasterZombie

Modular Weaponry

Recommended Posts

Rather than cutting weapons up into several different ranges, classes, speeds, etc, I think it would be smarter (and allow for much more customization) if guns were put into a couple simple groups (Size of the base: anywhere from .25 meters to 100+ meters) as well as classifying the type of weapon they are (Spinal, Turret) plus maybe some damage types like kinetic, energy, or whatever. Everything else like range, speed, accuracy, tracking, and all the other stats that a gun should have can be controlled by modules, similar to the weapon system in From the Depths. Want a more accurate gun? Add a longer barrel. better tracking? Increase the power to the turret rotor system. This would even allow for an actual "Death Star" type ship in the game if a ton of people were crazy enough to assemble a massive ship with the majority of the interior dedicated to powerups for the one gun. On a smaller scale, it could also allow for ships to wildly customize their arsenal, like having a main gun designed specifically to take out fighters, or a high range and high damage but incredibly inaccurate gun designed for orbital bombardment onto a city. With a weapons system like this, the possibilities in PvP will be endless, just like they are in the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 0something0 said:

I disagree. In a world where everything* is supposed to be player-made, why should this exlude functional modules?

Elements are made by NQ, things like engines etc, these, as far as I know, are not player changeable (except for maybe textures). I hope these aren't what you are referring to as modules?

 

The world is player made, however not EVERYTHING is player made - some of it (elements and orbital bodies like suns/planets/moon/roids etc) are NQ made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am refering to said elements. I think it would be cool to be able to experiment and build using costume materials and parts and promote emergent gameplay. For instance: 

 

Faction A is at war with B and is short on metal x which is needed for a vital component. However, it can be substituted for metal y at the cost of reduced peformance and lifeslan. Do they accept reduced production by sticking with metal x or risk using metal y?

 

The addition of custom parts would also diversify the economy everywhere as R&D industries would become more prominent.

 

And finally, if you can build ships, why not the parts on said ships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 0something0 said:

Yes, I am refering to said elements. I think it would be cool to be able to experiment and build using costume materials and parts and promote emergent gameplay. For instance: 

 

Faction A is at war with B and is short on metal x which is needed for a vital component. However, it can be substituted for metal y at the cost of reduced peformance and lifeslan. Do they accept reduced production by sticking with metal x or risk using metal y?

 

The addition of custom parts would also diversify the economy everywhere as R&D industries would become more prominent.

 

And finally, if you can build ships, why not the parts on said ships?

The above has a couple of problems.

  • Much harder for NQ code for, especially in combat
  • How could anyone be sure exactly what they are getting when buying, say an engine, on the market? Could be made of wood and burn up within the first second of use, and the client may have paid top dollar for it thinking it was a high end Tech 11 component only to be sold what is effectively a dud.

Share this post


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

Yes, I am refering to said elements. I think it would be cool to be able to experiment and build using costume materials and parts and promote emergent gameplay. For instance: 

 

Faction A is at war with B and is short on metal x which is needed for a vital component. However, it can be substituted for metal y at the cost of reduced peformance and lifeslan. Do they accept reduced production by sticking with metal x or risk using metal y?

 

The addition of custom parts would also diversify the economy everywhere as R&D industries would become more prominent.

 

And finally, if you can build ships, why not the parts on said ships?

 

People have such exorbitant fantasies of complex mechanics. I just wanna blast people and take over territory.

Custom parts would flood the markets with unintelligible crap. Also: Balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

The above has a couple of problems.

  • Much harder for NQ code for, especially in combat
  • How could anyone be sure exactly what they are getting when buying, say an engine, on the market? Could be made of wood and burn up within the first second of use, and the client may have paid top dollar for it thinking it was a high end Tech 11 component only to be sold what is effectively a dud.

1. So my idea is that the parts would be fabricated by a fabrication unit. So, each element would have a locked performance specification when it is actually made into an element.

2. You see, that is the beauty of a free market! DU is supposed to be unregulated (unless it is TOS-breaching) so it is up to the players to do something about scammers like putting a bounty on the dealer and spreading the word about scammers. They would be forced out of the market when the news spreads. Alternatively, the item specs could be hardcoded into the element. 

7 hours ago, Thokan said:

 

People have such exorbitant fantasies of complex mechanics. I just wanna blast people and take over territory.

Custom parts would flood the markets with unintelligible crap. Also: Balance.

I disagree. There still would be defined elements, but each variant would have its specific specs. Its like how there already are plans to add different engines and whatnot, except its player-made in a player-build universe. And while balance is a concern, but some designs are simply going to be better then others. Balancing should be pretty easy if physics is at least somewhat adhered to, since then we won't have terawatt lasers with little heat output or some BS like that. 

Share this post


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

1. So my idea is that the parts would be fabricated by a fabrication unit. So, each element would have a locked performance specification when it is actually made into an element.

Hand making an Element, or fabricating one, still doesn't change the fact that it would be harder for NQ code for, especially in battle/movement performance, no matter what its 'locked' stats are.

 

4 hours ago, 0something0 said:

2. You see, that is the beauty of a free market! DU is supposed to be unregulated (unless it is TOS-breaching) so it is up to the players to do something about scammers like putting a bounty on the dealer and spreading the word about scammers. They would be forced out of the market when the news spreads. Alternatively, the item specs could be hardcoded into the element

Um, no, just no, it has nothing to do with scammers.... If I want to buy , say Engine XX, I expect it to have all the performance characteristic of Engine XX , to ensure that when I attach that engine to my ship that my ship then performs to my ships specifications.

 

If I am FORCED to check each performance characteristic of every Engine XX on the market, before I purchase, makes for long and tedious play. Not really knowing the volume and types of materials used to create a particular Engine XX - which determines build costs, and influences what the sale price would be, means I don't know if I am paying a fair price for the unit.

 

No, I need Elements, designed by NQ, manufactured by players, to have known material input types and volumes, which creates an element that has known and standardised performance characteristics. Anything else would be mind-numbingly frustrating.

 

Designing a ship to have standardised capacities/characteristics, and then having a client manufacture the ship, would become a virtually impossible task as all the Elements that the client needs to have to build the ship will be variable, and hence the ships performance will be highly variable. This outcome is not wanted by the designer, the builder, nor the end client.

 

If you have ever played Eve online you will know they have thousands of interchangeable modules/elements, that each have various types and tech levels, ( all enhanced by a characters skill base), with various materials and internal techs inside each module/element - depending on the module/element. This provides lots of variety of how a ship can be built and perform. However it also allows for the creation of those modules/elements with known performance characteristics and 'build costs' - which influences sale costs.

 

Bottom line is you can have variable performing ships and constructs by using hundreds/thousands of Elements that have consistent build inputs and known performance characteristics. But you can design and build a ship to meet the desired performance level.

 

This may sound more complex (lots of known modules/elements) than your idea, but in the end it provides a standards based approach that allows for the creation of ships/vehicles/constructs with predictable/known/reproducible performance characteristics ;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

Hand making an Element, or fabricating one, still doesn't change the fact that it would be harder for NQ code for, especially in battle/movement performance, no matter what its 'locked' stats are.

Well, each element would have a file associated with it with all the properties of the elements, regardless of of whether it was player-designed or NQ-designed. While it might take more time and performance for the server to get the associated data, I don't see it having that big of a performance. 

20 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

Um, no, just no, it has nothing to do with scammers.... If I want to buy , say Engine XX, I expect it to have all the performance characteristic of Engine XX , to ensure that when I attach that engine to my ship that my ship then performs to my ships specifications.

I read that as you talking about people marketing crappy elements as a high-end one like those E-Bay GPU scammers...

20 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

If I am FORCED to check each performance characteristic of every Engine XX on the market, before I purchase, makes for long and tedious play. Not really knowing the volume and types of materials used to create a particular Engine XX - which determines build costs, and influences what the sale price would be, means I don't know if I am paying a fair price for the unit.

And you wouldn't check specs for the pre-made NQ parts? If you were an org, you obviously would want your stuff to be standardized and use a bulk-order contract. If you were making the ship for yourself, you wouldn't really be buying engines a lot unless you were a bad pilot. And you would know the fair price for an element by looking at its final specs. For example, I would say even though the F-35 incorporates high-grade aerospace materials into its design, its lackluster performance and high cost means it wouldn't be a good deal regardless of the materials used.

20 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

No, I need Elements, designed by NQ, manufactured by players, to have known material input types and volumes, which creates an element that has known and standardised performance characteristics. Anything else would be mind-numbingly frustrating.

Again, bulk-order from a trusted manufacturer if you want intra-org standardization. Alternatively, design it in-house if that is what you want. 

20 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

Designing a ship to have standardised capacities/characteristics, and then having a client manufacture the ship, would become a virtually impossible task as all the Elements that the client needs to have to build the ship will be variable, and hence the ships performance will be highly variable. This outcome is not wanted by the designer, the builder, nor the end client.

Use blueprints. If element X with performance Z uses material set Y, element X made with same material set Y will have the same performance Z (unless NQ rebalanced something but thats still going to be a thing with pre-made elements.)

21 hours ago, CoreVamore said:

If you have ever played Eve online you will know they have thousands of interchangeable modules/elements, that each have various types and tech levels, ( all enhanced by a characters skill base), with various materials and internal techs inside each module/element - depending on the module/element. This provides lots of variety of how a ship can be built and perform. However it also allows for the creation of those modules/elements with known performance characteristics and 'build costs' - which influences sale costs.

Well, what if these interchangeable elements had interchangeable elements in them, at least at the time of manufacturing/design?

 

tl;dr You seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. Bottom line is that instead of having only a limited set of elements to choose from, you could say make an engine with various sub-components of your choosing like the nozzle, combustion chamber, turbopump, fuel input/output, etc or a turret with different materials for the barrel or the base and whatnot.

 

It would be not so different from what Childern of a Dead Earth has (but not as complex probably)

AXlk0za.jpg

or the Tinkers Constructs mod for Minecraft

Stenciling.png

 

Share this post


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

Well, each element would have a file associated with it with all the properties of the elements, regardless of of whether it was player-designed or NQ-designed. While it might take more time and performance for the server to get the associated data, I don't see it having that big of a performance. 

It doesnt mater if a file is associated with it, or not, doesnt matter how its implemented, it would still be harder to code for and would likely have a greater strain on the server than known parts with standard/known properties.

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

I read that as you talking about people marketing crappy elements as a high-end one like those E-Bay GPU scammers...

Nope, dont care if they are crappy, or fantastic, its the need to check what is essentially the same part to see its properties to make sure it is what I want.

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

And you wouldn't check specs for the pre-made NQ parts?

Of course I would, but, I would also KNOW that Engine XX has the performance of Engine XX - not a thousand variances on its performance.

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

 

If you were an org, you obviously would want your stuff to be standardized and use a bulk-order contract.

That thats just a band-aid solution for a poor idea.

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

If you were making the ship for yourself, you wouldn't really be buying engines a lot unless you were a bad pilot.

Bad pilot? thats got zero to do with what is being discussed lol It all about reproducible ways of building.

 

NQ has said that they will be following how Eve Online does things. That may or may not mean a version of Eve's module system. I am basing my argument on the fact that it will be similar as well as the benefits of doing that way.

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

And you would know the fair price for an element by looking at its final specs. For example, I would say even though the F-35 incorporates high-grade aerospace materials into its design, its lackluster performance and high cost means it wouldn't be a good deal regardless of the materials used.

No, and you are looking at the whole product there, not modules/elements. Im talking at the module/element level. At that level you need to know what materials went into it to have a good guide as to its sale price, its simple economics.

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

Again, bulk-order from a trusted manufacturer if you want intra-org standardization. Alternatively, design it in-house if that is what you want. 

Use blueprints. If element X with performance Z uses material set Y, element X made with same material set Y will have the same performance Z (unless NQ rebalanced something but thats still going to be a thing with pre-made elements.)

Well, what if these interchangeable elements had interchangeable elements in them, at least at the time of manufacturing/design?

Firstly, a ship blueprint will have the blueprint of the ship itself and the elements it uses, However, the elements it uses will have to be added to the manufacturing process as actual components. For example 30 tones of steel, 10 tonnes of glass, 40 tonnes of plastic, 2 Engine XX, 5 autocannons, 1 radar unit, 3 jammers, and 1 pussy magnet. You wont be using the element bleprints  in the building of your ship as the elements must be produced first and have the actual elements added as materials when the ship is manufactured.

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

tl;dr You seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. Bottom line is that instead of having only a limited set of elements to choose from, you could say make an engine with various sub-components of your choosing like the nozzle, combustion chamber, turbopump, fuel input/output, etc or a turret with different materials for the barrel or the base and whatnot.

ok this ^^ i have no problem with as its an element which is made out of known modules with known performance characteristics. Its no different to how a ship would be made. In fact doing it this way would be easier for NQ from the perspective that, for example, an auto-cannon  would have the same look, but may vary substantially in its performance, making it harder for someone to guess what the battle capacities of the ship is before they attack. It keeps the looks the same while varying the performance - this I like.

 

But once again, provided the modules that go into that engine have standard/known/consistent attributes for a particular module. That way I can be certain that 1 + 1 = 2, not 2.2 or 1.35 etc ;)

 

 

2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

It would be not so different from what Childern of a Dead Earth has (but not as complex probably)

AXlk0za.jpg

or the Tinkers Constructs mod for Minecraft

Stenciling.png

 

 

Knowing Eve Online, and knowing NQ, I would say that if such a thing as the above was implemented then it may be more complex, and it would definitely have a larger variety of components. etc etc etc.

 

Though, my guess is that some of the sliders for material thickness may be less fine grained, with say 10 levels each, instead of the thousands they seem to be capable of.

 

Either way..... wish I was in game to see how NQ is tackling some of this.... we both may be right and not know it while we waste our energy discussing this

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd enjoy some directional hull mounted weapons like a massive cannon you can add more peices to making it longer and more powerful something similar to the UNSC MAC cannon as seen in the game franchise halo 

Maybe even allow for some creative lua scripting say for example controling the timing of the firing of the weapon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking for a forum thread of implementation ideas. More based on the building system.
But while I read this I want to put in my two cents. ^^ (?? idiom "Give my mustard"?)
I read of many problems for overpowered guns. But don't forget that there may be overpowered defense systems, too. Of course you can use BFGs for defense. I mean rather shields, sensors and a secret service. While shields will also need much energy, but let's say the biggest one is strong enouth for lots of BFG impacts. They make it possible to strike back effectively. Also BFGs can appear on the sensors while routine scanning a ship. Showing a high energy usage or if hidden/deactivated a disproportionately power generation or power storage. When we talk small ships with nuclear weapons there will be a level of radiation and sensors trigger alarms. This may not work if the sensors are near to own nuclear weapons and so on. All of this may lead to using security protocols. You know.. Political and military squabble. ^^ hm.. BTT: Modular Weapons sound interesting. There are many possibilities of weapon systems and NQ read our ideas. I'm sure NQ will do a good job. They will balance it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote on only weapons being pitchforks and shovels with an occasional hoe in the crowd/mob. Now that that is settled.

Question:

How come digging tools do not work on "Bags of mostly water"  ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a certain level of randomness to the elements stats, but I think the best way of implementing it would be through researching various stats specifically, for instance, if I research fuel efficiency I can make progressively more fuel efficient engine schematics as I spend time researching it, the same with other stats.  Therefore if I spend a great amount of game time researching all the things, I will be able to create an engine schematic that is pretty awesome.  The amount of improvement from base to totally sick can easily be tailored by NQ, but effectively, you would have certain schematics that are sought after for different applications, and the system could be designed where you can only change three of five stats from whatever the default base stats are (just spitballing on the number of stats here).  This would allow a player who's dedicated their game time to being an engine manufacturer a viable source of steady customers, as well as recognition as a good engine supplier, much like GE or Rocketdyne in today's world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2018 at 9:11 AM, SonEasterZombie said:

Rather than cutting weapons up into several different ranges, classes, speeds, etc, I think it would be smarter (and allow for much more customization) if guns were put into a couple simple groups (Size of the base: anywhere from .25 meters to 100+ meters) as well as classifying the type of weapon they are (Spinal, Turret) plus maybe some damage types like kinetic, energy, or whatever. Everything else like range, speed, accuracy, tracking, and all the other stats that a gun should have can be controlled by modules, similar to the weapon system in From the Depths. Want a more accurate gun? Add a longer barrel. better tracking? Increase the power to the turret rotor system. This would even allow for an actual "Death Star" type ship in the game if a ton of people were crazy enough to assemble a massive ship with the majority of the interior dedicated to powerups for the one gun. On a smaller scale, it could also allow for ships to wildly customize their arsenal, like having a main gun designed specifically to take out fighters, or a high range and high damage but incredibly inaccurate gun designed for orbital bombardment onto a city. With a weapons system like this, the possibilities in PvP will be endless, just like they are in the rest of the game.

Modular Weapons are neat ... but they need to be kept in check or well balanced.

Or bigger orgs will dominate everything with their deathrays of doom.

 

 

PS: I like your avatar xD. Cute cat/foxgirl.

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...