EVE Search - Turret weapon redesign

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Turret weapon redesign

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Charles Edisson Isk Incorporated 24	Posted - 2012.01.13 17:50:00 - [1] - Quote Totally rework turret based weapons. 1 New relationship between tracking and transversal velocity. If a hostile ships transversal is greater than your guns tracking then you miss 100% of the time. If it is equal to or greater then you might hit and proceed to part two of the calculation. 2 Projectile weapons are given an apparent velocity and thus flight time. no need to make them physical entities in the game like missiles just do it virtually. This would be where a new calculation based on the aggressors motion prediction, targets evasive manoeuvre, ship signature and projectile flight time should be used. The output should be a sliding value between 0 and 1. Then you have a random number multiplier to let big ships occasionally hit smaller ones to a point but when they do it's catastrophic. i.e. you miss 499 times but the 500th and only hitting shot is a kill. Unfortunately due to physics Amarr ships should get a value or 1 here as lasers flight time would be near instantaneous but it would be realistic. might need to alter Amarr weapons to make this balanced. On different classes of ship this would have a massive impact on applied DPS. frig classed hull might need to shift 20-30m to miss a shot and being a nimble ship this would be easy, where as a Titan needs to move 15Km in 3 or 4 seconds, which is not going to happen. It also changes how damage is applied. as you get closer to an enemy damage goes up and up and up as the time component of the evasive manoeuvre V motion prediction part of the equation is reduced but get too close and you cross the tracking tipping point and suddenly DPS is zero. This lets weapons keep their current ranges as AC would be short barrel low velocity projectiles so even though they can shoot out to massive distances it's easy to avoid the rounds. where as artillery are going to be long barrel higher velocity projectiles and much more difficult to get out the way of. Rails would have higher still velocities and be harder to avoid and beams near instant and almost impossible to avoid unless you say write in a detectable fire time to energy weapons thus building in a time to the evasion equation.
Mars Theran EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance 53	Posted - 2012.01.14 00:42:00 - [2] - Quote Your post is one of the first I've seen; where I would actually have to say this is a bad idea. It completely dumbs down the game; and dumbing down EVE is bad. Bad idea: Removing advanced automated turret control systems, and replacing with I want to hit the target fire control with no ability to lead-off based on distance, speed, and trajectory. EVEs ships have much more advanced systems than your proposal; with the ability to calculate Transversal and Radial Velocities, compensate for own ship velocity, lead off against expected position, and fire with enough accuracy to at least hit the target most of the time. Depending on various factors, that hit may be effectively a miss; but it is not an arbitrary number or randomly generated one. Instead, it is calculated based on a number of factors. Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not.
Tarn Kugisa Modern Mining Industries Space Mongolians 24	Posted - 2012.01.14 02:27:00 - [3] - Quote Mars Theran wrote: Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. They hit and do some damage 100% of the time though. I'll consider that good enough (besides for MWDing Spider Drones) Real Caldari Hull Tank (And Win doing so) Support https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=16580
Charles Edisson Isk Incorporated 24	Posted - 2012.01.14 15:22:00 - [4] - Quote Mars Theran wrote: Your post is one of the first I've seen; where I would actually have to say this is a bad idea. It completely dumbs down the game; and dumbing down EVE is bad. Bad idea: Removing advanced automated turret control systems, and replacing with I want to hit the target fire control with no ability to lead-off based on distance, speed, and trajectory. EVEs ships have much more advanced systems than your proposal; with the ability to calculate Transversal and Radial Velocities, compensate for own ship velocity, lead off against expected position, and fire with enough accuracy to at least hit the target most of the time. Depending on various factors, that hit may be effectively a miss; but it is not an arbitrary number or randomly generated one. Instead, it is calculated based on a number of factors. Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. You didnt ready past item one did you. or if you did you didn't understand the concept. I did not say you must hit if your tracking is fast enough to track the enemy, I said you could hit the target, and if your tracking was too slow that you would miss the target. The ships might have fancy electronics and I know it's a scifi game but I'm fairly sure Newtonian physics should still apply to moving objects. I also think you will find there is some random component to turret damage currently, try having two ships totaly stationary for a test and shoot multiple volleys at each other, the damage is not the same value every time so there is chance built in.
Goose99 668	Posted - 2012.01.14 16:47:00 - [5] - Quote Tarn Kugisa wrote: Mars Theran wrote: Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. They hit and do some damage 100% of the time though. I'll consider that good enough (besides for MWDing Spider Drones) Confirming this, guns should also deal 1 dps, no more, no less, 100% of the time.
Charles Edisson Isk Incorporated 28	Posted - 2012.01.20 12:45:00 - [6] - Quote Goose99 wrote: Tarn Kugisa wrote: Mars Theran wrote: Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. They hit and do some damage 100% of the time though. I'll consider that good enough (besides for MWDing Spider Drones) Confirming this, guns should also deal 1 dps, no more, no less, 100% of the time. Constructive comments only please.
Skippermonkey Tactical Knightmare 323	Posted - 2012.01.20 15:10:00 - [7] - Quote Charles Edisson wrote: Goose99 wrote: Tarn Kugisa wrote: Mars Theran wrote: Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. They hit and do some damage 100% of the time though. I'll consider that good enough (besides for MWDing Spider Drones) Confirming this, guns should also deal 1 dps, no more, no less, 100% of the time. Constructive comments only please. delete the OP then
Charles Edisson Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda 28	Posted - 2012.02.13 22:27:00 - [8] - Quote Skippermonkey wrote: Charles Edisson wrote: Goose99 wrote: Tarn Kugisa wrote: Mars Theran wrote: Missiles are dumber. I wish they were smarter, but they're not. They hit and do some damage 100% of the time though. I'll consider that good enough (besides for MWDing Spider Drones) Confirming this, guns should also deal 1 dps, no more, no less, 100% of the time. Constructive comments only please. delete the OP then You must be the butt of many jokes in RL to be so angry. It's funny how anonimity brings our the spite in people. Humans really are an unpleasant species.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.