+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31)
+---- Thread: Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) (/showthread.php?tid=8682)
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - McNeo - 05-21-2008
If missiles get these improvements, then I would also ask for each missile to take up 2 ammo slots instead of one, leaving a total of 35 missiles. This would put those in vanilla ships at a serious disadvantage, adding to the ones present already.
You already see very few if any people in a werewolf. This can only make instances such as this worse.
Missiles are already very good, and it takes only a few mistakes and you lose your guns if not your ship. I do not like the idea of missiles being used as an "equaliser" for less skilled players to use against more skilled players, which is essentially what such an upgrade would do. Six missile launchers and any opposing player could kiss his backside goodbye.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - me_b_kevin - 05-21-2008
' Wrote:If missiles get these improvements, then I would also ask for each missile to take up 2 ammo slots instead of one, leaving a total of 35 missiles. This would put those in vanilla ships at a serious disadvantage, adding to the ones present already.
You already see very few if any people in a werewolf. This can only make instances such as this worse.
Missiles are already very good, and it takes only a few mistakes and you lose your guns if not your ship. I do not like the idea of missiles being used as an "equaliser" for less skilled players to use against more skilled players, which is essentially what such an upgrade would do. Six missile launchers and any opposing player could kiss his backside goodbye.
i'm all for lowering the ammo limit. like you say if someone were to load up a Ravens Claw with 8 different missile launchers that would spell "bad" for anyone else. plus with such a load out i doubt the ship could house the 560 missiles realistically speaking. i would even go as far as to make them take up as much as 7 ammo slots. 10 missiles should be plenty, but with the high risk of missing a higher number would probably be more reasonable.
AGAIN i stress the point that increasing the speed of missiles doesn't mean they are automatically going to hit. multiple factors still play into the equation here: firing angles, speed, type of missile, debris, whether or not the target drops a counter measure.
for pete sake you make it sound like increasing missile speed is going to turn them into a death ray incapable of missing. i argue that it is at least worth a try and shouldn't be completely shot down when it's in the idea phase.
the idea here is to make missiles viable weapons outside of a jousting scenario.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - mjolnir - 05-21-2008
I know... problem is how to do this without making them uber 1vs1.
Improving current level 9/10 missiles will do that.
If you add speed they will be simply too fast/good when fired with thruster.
What about making new missile with some 1500 damage (firestalker has 2400), but some 200 speed a better tracking?
With some balancing it can be made to be "support missile" in larger fights (like shooting guns(or thruster) off a bomber that is attacking the capship you are defending).
1vs1 it will still be better to go for the Cannonball and in mixed scenarios with Firestalker/Sidewinder.
--------------------------
Another thing that I noticed in FLstat is:
Seeker forward degree
From the name it seems it's the angle where the missiles "sees" target.
All normal missiles have 35
CDs have 90 - 135
This value could definitely be increased a bit.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - Snapp - 05-21-2008
Quote:Another very deadly combination that works even when not jousting is exploding your own missiles with a CD when they come close to target.
Missles:
Forgive me for possibly sounding stupid but isnt it kinda redundant to have to fire a second "weapon" to explode the first one? The point of firing a missile in the first place is that you expect it to track and detonate atleast somewhat close to what you fired it at. If a CD or gun is needed to explode a missile and make them usefull, then to me that says the missile tracking system needs to be upgraded. Not the speed, but the detection and tracking/turning yes.
Mines:
Yes they should be stationary, cept the "tracking" ones that were designed to move, but even then they should only move at impulse speeds.
Just my 2 cents.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - Tenacity - 05-21-2008
it's funny really... any time I get into an engagement with someone who's using missiles or cruise disruptors I just dive into an asteroid or debris field. Most missiles and CD's will blow up ten feet in front of your ship when you try to fire them in any kind of debris field, and it seems to happen even when they dont actually 'hit' anything, they just decide there's too much dust in the air and self detonate.
While we're talking ballistics here... similar improvements need to be applied to capship-grade missile turrets. Right now, they dont even hurt the shields on any other decent sized ship. They dont lock on half the time, miss the other half, are slower than fighter grade missiles, and if you fire several at once... when the first one hits it blows the others up before they get to the target. Unless you're in open space going up against a single fighter, the missile turrets are entirely worthless.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - mjolnir - 05-21-2008
' Wrote:While we're talking ballistics here... similar improvements need to be applied to capship-grade missile turrets. Right now, they dont even hurt the shields on any other decent sized ship. They dont lock on half the time, miss the other half, are slower than fighter grade missiles, and if you fire several at once... when the first one hits it blows the others up before they get to the target. Unless you're in open space going up against a single fighter, the missile turrets are entirely worthless.
Don't try to bring this up.... learn to use them....
if you have lag it's kind of your fault... not the mods... you can't change the mod to take lag into account.
If they don't lock re-target
They fly at 145 m/s which is FASTER than any fighter missile. If you take ship speed into account you get 90-99 +200= 290-299 for fighters and 145+ 140= 285 for GB/cruiser. Which is basically the same.
They have unlimited ammo - basically the only unbalanced thing about them.
"Don't even hurt shield of a decently sized ship" - they are anti fighter and anti-hull just like all other missiles except paralyzer.
Don't see any problems firing several at once from my corner... and I do use them a lot.
They also do track and detonate next to the target much better than any fighter missiles.
I remember fighting 2 BD bombers in a GB.. blasting all their guns off. Or 4 Sabres with some infernos alone in GB.. killing 2 of them with missiles and more..
Just recently one other guy from KNF killed 4 fighters in his GB using missile turrets.
Capship missiles require skill to use, just like they should, nobody really wants an "I win" button do you?
EDIT: Just like with fighter ones it's 95% about the timing.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - Dantrithor - 05-22-2008
Right. About cap ships missiles (specially in gunboats). Two bombers should easily take out a single LH gunship, right?
I completely unarmed two bombers with supernovas using missile turrets while not even using all batts/botts. And that's when 4 of my missile launchers are the "basic" class.
They are effective. Very effective. The only time i have had problems was against 5 fighters, and only because some had minirazors and they were too many to reduce them in an acceptable time. But anyway, a gunboat against 5 fighters should be difficult.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - Generation - 05-22-2008
I say leave the missile stats as they are, but I think the tracking system needs to be seriously updated.
I mean I fired a Sidewinder the other day and it flew right past my target.
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - SevereTrinity - 05-22-2008
I use misiisles a lot, as anyone who's fought me knows, and, most of the time, 1 or 2 hits with a paralyzzer with deshields someone, then its simply a sidewinder, cannonball, or nuke mine till they are dead, at least, thats my tactic, what I tend to do is fire from 500M if they don't CD me, and then I pull away so they don't have time to hit me.
But if they use train CDs, I tend to just go right up 100 or so Metres from them and fire, while firing guns on the approach.
I think Cap ship missiles are fine, for instance, on my bomber, I had stopped some traders (I thought they would try to ignore the embargo, and the had a BH Battle-Cruiser as there guard.
When I fired the Supernova as a warning, the BC fired 3 missiles and all its armanent at me, and none of them hit, as they are all sMised me.
@mjolnir: Sure, Cap Ship missiles home on a traget at close to fighter missile speeds, but when do BCs and Cruisers thrust towards a fighter target?
Usually they stay still in Turret View and fire
Ballistics (missiles/mines/etc) - mjolnir - 05-22-2008
' Wrote:@mjolnir: Sure, Cap Ship missiles home on a traget at close to fighter missile speeds, but when do BCs and Cruisers thrust towards a fighter target?
Usually they stay still in Turret View and fire
I do it on my Kussari dessie all the time...but that thing is more of a gunboat than a cruiser actually.
For that reason the BS missiles could be a bit faster ~250 maybe, cruiser ones a tiny bit faster maybe too ~170.
GB missiles are fine, except they should use ammo, so that we don't get 6 missiles on a GB..that is what I call missile abuse.