Jump to content

Recommended Posts

@CosmicDragon


They said it will a lock-on/cone of fire combat, possibly like TERA Online. They possibly will release a gameplay feature within the month of july and possibly at Gamescom at August. Maybe we'll see combat then O_o ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see a tabtargeting system work...

IF the movement is actionbased combined with that weapons have limited arcs.

The issue with EVE is that it honestly don't matter where you are, you can still be shot as long as you are within the range orb. 

BUT if they made this the case, then the combat wouldn't be so much about ATTACKING as it would be with movement, which would make it very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tnecniw


I read they are working on collision physics in the game engine or something. Perhaps projectiles will have to make direct contact to damage you and possibly battleships will have an actual role as "tanks". Hopefully the game won't be a point and click adventure like EVE is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tnecniw

 

 

I read they are working on collision physics in the game engine or something. Perhaps projectiles will have to make direct contact to damage you and possibly battleships will have an actual role as "tanks". Hopefully the game won't be a point and click adventure like EVE is.

Lets hope that indeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@OnePercent

Coilguns offer armor pen , railguns not as much.

Not really sure what the context here is; Are you saying that generally as a game trope games that feature coil guns are given a stronger armor penetration value? Because I can already provide elite dangerous as an example where rail guns have the strongest penetration value in the game aside from erm.. slamming your ship into the enemy xD

 

But on a reality standpoint, rail guns and especially the railguns that the navy are testing and experiment with have rails being able to reach mach 8-16 which is basicallu hypersonic speeds, using ultra capacitators.

 

I've never seen real life experiments with coil guns maching the same speed but I would assume that coil guns are far less efficient than rail guns in payload delivery, as there is far more resistance in electromagnetic coils than in rails, as well as the fact that coils can only widthstand a certain amout of amperage before they...melt and there's also the computational problem of timing on/off switching for each coil to further accelerate the projectile.

 

As for your rifling assesment, both rails and coil guns don't need rifling, as they are linear accelerators, but I guess it should be possible to rifle coil guns, perhaps because they can't reach the same muzzel velocities as rail guns and thus need extra angular momentum to provide added stability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@OnePercent

I said it earlier I think, that coilguns provide stability. There's no debate on what can take greater amperage. Stability and precision is the name of the game when it comes to ballistic weaponry though, (that mass drivers fall as a type of weapon category.)


Sure, you can build a railgun that can reach 0.4 Light. If it's not stable upon leaving the muzzle, it's as effective at long range as taking a piss on the wind. And the "rifling" I mentioned ina metaphorical. You won't gonna carve the danrn thing on the inside :P It's the torque that can be created that allows for stability. Paradoxically, having a chat with my father, who had made low powered coil-guns on our basement when I was young to show me how magnets worked (yeah, father of the year, for every year thereafter xD ), told me that coil-guns could be used a closer-range weaponry to focus ionised particles, like accelerators, as they could be used as "magnetic funnels" so to speak, to focus plasma down on a fixed point. As I said, shorter range. Like... shortsword metaphor of a range, railguns being the friggging longbows.

But the real question here is this. Should ships suffer a precision penalty in the game when firing such huge-ass mass-drivers on the move? Perhaps giving ship roles depending on the weaponry. Mass-driver ships acting as "snipers" so to speak, and if the Devs decide to go for a TERA lock-on mechanic (keeping your target in your cross-hairs for a determined wind-up "casting time" ) , it would be really immersive, as your rail-gun charges up and your ship being cumbersome, having to struggle with keeping the lock-on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really cool dude, the sniper ship concept is also in sword of the stars as well where you can have dreadnoughts with spinal mount mass drivers that can pick off targets at a distance, pretty cool concept i think.

 

Would also be quite hilarious roleplaying in a bridge commander type scenario trying to dodge the enemy empires new superweapon.. the Spinal mount sniper mass drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as your rail-gun charges up and your ship being cumbersome, having to struggle with keeping the lock-on.

You and your weird ass weapon controls.

Why should i charge the caps only after lock on?

Charge them all the time and fire when i have a locked firing solution.

Not the other way around.

 

Yeah, coilguns can support a lower current, but then they can be switched way more efficiently than railguns, very likely approaching the >95% electrical-to-mechanical efficiency of modern electrical motors (because they are the same thing).

 

And its much much easier to build a coilgun that lasts for more than one shot than a railgun that does.

Aka a gun with military level reliability.

 

Tldr:

Coilguns are power limited.

Railguns are efficiency and reliability limited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're confusing atmospheric ballistics with space ballistics.

 

Why does an unstable round fly off course?  Because air resistance knocks it off course.

 

Once an item in a vacuum is placed in motion, it will continue on its vector until acted upon by another force.  It doesn't matter whether spin has been placed upon that object, or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cornflakes

My gameplay idea, was something that OnePercent elaborated more in depth. A length-wise, spinal mounted railgun on the ship.  Given the ship will have to deliver a POWERFUL shot that goes insane fast and make the ship act as a "sniper" unit, that would have to be balanced by the ships enormous size and mass, ergo inertia. Plus, having a railgun charged OUT of combat does sound like something really hazardous, really strainious for the ship's power core, no? O.o It's like gun-safety 101, never leave the safety off while hostering the gun. Same thing applies for railguns, but that's for a real life scenario. In game, it would be a good gameplay mechanic.

Think of those sniper ships like mages in fantasy MMOs (like WoW pyroblast casting, without istant cast buff in Vanilla WoW). They have to charge a lot before letting a powerful shot go down range, giving potential to counter-play or general higher brain functions that will make the receiving end seek cover.

But I hear you say "COVER IN SPACE BRUH?! ARE YOU STUPID BRUH?!"

My response : Asteroids, moons. Fighting in an open field, even in space, is not gonna work well for anyone.


So yeah, cumbersome as of a gameplay standpoint, as the ship draws power from the thrusters and so on to charge the railgun.



Happy now Cornflakes? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@captaintwerkmotor

 

Why would it be a strain on the power core? If its a significant strain after your caps are done charging your caps are crap and or about to fail.

 

You charge them before you need them that you dont have to expend the energy and time to charge them when you actually want to fire.

 

regardless of gun safety,

You dont put the magazine in your rifle /after/ putting your eye on the sights :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cornflakes


Dear, we haave to stop fightin for the sake of our children xD


I gave the charge-up example as a gameplay mechanism. So it would require skill and not be an i-Win button scenario.

Plus, the whole sniping logic makes no sense. The moment an enemy ship sees you bringing your huge ass railgun facing them, they would immediately start maneuvering, therefore missing. Kinetic bombardments though are still cool to go. Planets can't do the jukes. 

So yeah, for space-jousting combat, coil-guns are the way, as huge-ass plasma hoses O_o .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TranquilClaws how realistic do you want this conversation to be?  I ask because your weapon examples follow some very well established though unrealistic tropes in Hollywood and science fiction.  (Nothing wrong with this it does make their use exciting.)  So I don't understand what flaws you want us to point out.  At the speeds, you reach in space most of these weapon systems would only be useful in area-denial tactics for instance, and the others are classically misrepresented in the before mentioned tropes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be interesting to have a mix of lock on and cone of fire. You can lock on to the enemy behind you, but your forward mounted cannons can't fire behind you. But your full range turrets can. Your forward mounted cannons can't fire at the enemy directly behind you, but it can fire at a secondary target in front of you that was marked earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TranquilClaws how realistic do you want this conversation to be?  I ask because your weapon examples follow some very well established though unrealistic tropes in Hollywood and science fiction.  (Nothing wrong with this it does make their use exciting.)  So I don't understand what flaws you want us to point out.  At the speeds, you reach in space most of these weapon systems would only be useful in area-denial tactics for instance, and the others are classically misrepresented in the before mentioned tropes.

 

Eh, I was thinking from a game play standpoint. The idea was to ask if people thought these things would be "fun" to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I was thinking from a game play standpoint. The idea was to ask if people thought these things would be "fun" to use.

 

I think that would be entirely dependent on what you mean and how the game design favors (if) any particular aspect.  

 

First off many of your categories and explanation are somewhat....  Arbitrary and vague.  

You have listed "Electromagnetic Pulses (including ion cannons)" .  You stated if used against unprotected targets it would disable them but that they have the advantage of not being able to be "intercepted".  So which is it can I or can I not defend myself from this attack?  Is there more to it that I was to assume?  If so keep in mind what you assume to be true is going to be different than what others will.  For instance, Ions are simply atoms that are missing an electron (a cation) or have an extra electron (an anion).  If you then say "Ion Cannon" what I envision is going to be vastly different than what you envision.

 

You mention a lot of 'elemental' damage types.  In every game I have ever played that uses elemental damage types, I found one element more useful in more situations than the others.  As an example, the game Borderlands has many elemental damage types. Fire is more effective against certain targets and less effective against others but a weapon using corrosive damage would never be LESS effective against any particular target in Borderlands.  This aspect of Borderlands pushed players to either build a character who was effective against everybody but pretty standard no matter which character you played or build a character that overwhelmingly destroyed certain enemy types and had a harder time with others.  

AND yes I am sure there are games that exist that balance elemental aspects out more effectively and don't run into this particular issue.  Just as I am sure there are hippos that paint houses.....  But I ain't seen one yet.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting question would be how the damage system works. Has your ship an overall health bar and if it fades will the whole ship get destroyed at once? If someone played From the Depths, it featured vehicles of blocks and components aswell and each part had its own healthpoints... If one got destroyed and everything that didnt connect to the ship-core fell apart (I guess this kind of system is way too much computing for large spacebattles, so i wouldnt expect such thing...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for self mending armor, it was said in an interview with the developers (sorry i don't remember which one) that there would be the possibility of this, with very similar mechanics to what you stated, with the parts of the ship (elements included) being repaired by another element which took up power and raw resources to repair as of a blueprint type system, so that if the ship took damage it would repair to how it was exactly if there were enough resources being fed into it.

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...