| Author |
Missiles |
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
|  Posted: 2005-06-18 17:47
I still feel missiles need an improvement. It feels like their hitrate was improved only from 5 percent hitrate to 10 percent.
I donno if its just me, but I feel like missiles, especially shorter-ranged missiles should be more anti-dessie. Becides, its about TIME we get some anti-dessie weapons that are effective, rather than only effective Anti-Dread weapons (Torpedo, Cannon)
Missiles could use greater ammunition capacity and greater hitrates. Possibly a miniscule, tiny but there, boost in damage.
PS: Ill be honest with you, I think missile pathing is FUBAR atm.
[ This Message was edited by: RedXIII on 2005-06-18 17:48 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2005-06-18 20:31
Missiles as an anit-Dessie weapon? hmm.....
the only kind of heavy missle platform I know of his the ICC MIssle dread....and thats overkill on a dessie.........hmm.....
since most ships mount missles as a side dish, I think they should be weak, but like dead on aim.
_________________
|
Linna Yamazaka {Vice Admiral}
Vice Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 03, 2003
Posts: 415
From: killer
| Posted: 2005-06-18 20:33
Quote:
|
On 2005-06-18 20:31, Fattierob (x2 Pistolet Makarov) wrote:
since most ships mount missles as a side dish, I think they should be weak, but like dead on aim.
|
|
I agree with this they should be a 100% hit weapon but weak damage, However the less % they hit the more powerfuly they should be.
Just my two cents.
_________________
Two weeks™ Later and a new sig.
|
Fatal Rocko Willis
Fleet Admiral
Fatal Squadron
Joined: March 01, 2003
Posts: 1336
From: Kentucky
| Posted: 2005-06-18 21:51
IMO, Missiles should not be a 100% chance to hit weapon.... maybe a 75% to hit weapon.. Base 75% with + modifiers for ECCM in use by the firing ship and - modifiers to hit based on ECM used by the target ship...
You should also take into account the angle of approach of the missile to the target ship. This is a very modern thought on the way missiles work... Currently Surface to Air Missiles have to be fired straight at the approaching target becuase a hig angle of deflection can casue the missile to miss...
For example.... if a target is going at say .. speed 20... and a missile was fired in such a way as to approach from either the 270 or 90 degree radial it would be what is called a "High Deflection Shot". This would be a modifier to the chances of hitting since the missile will be moving forward and turning towards its target while the ship is moving forward and, if the pilot is smart, altering course radically (jinking) at the same time....
This is based on the knowledge I have learned as a Conventionaly Weapons Load Team Member... we had to learn about all aspects of weapons employment....
If you have any questions about how things work in real life ask away... 
Rocko
_________________
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2005-06-18 21:52
The Missile Dread, however, has all of it's missiles in forward-arc. A dessie just has to get behind a MD at close range to pwn it.
But surely, Missiles would be a great anti-dessy weapon, as we need one badly since Beams are not very effective anymore.
PS: Rocko, missiles dont quite work that way in Darkspace.
Not to mention if we based things off of Real life... not only would a missile have extremely high accuracy, but it could pwn just about anything in one hit. Including a ship. Why do you think cannons and ship-based torpedoes were scrapped for missiles missiles an more missiles?
[ This Message was edited by: RedXIII on 2005-06-18 21:55 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
c0ld
Midshipman
Joined: June 24, 2003
Posts: 342
From: UK
| Posted: 2005-06-19 05:09
100% accuracy would be ok, so long as a ship could mount counter-measures.
_________________
|
JRE
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 14, 2003
Posts: 571
| Posted: 2005-06-19 07:31
Have more of a variety of missles you can choose, from high damage/low hit missles to low damage/high hit missles. Other weapons as well?
_________________
|
Doran
Chief Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 29, 2003
Posts: 4032
From: The Gideon Unit
| Posted: 2005-06-19 09:21
well thats another thing for the levels system.
if weapons are going to commonly be having less ammo at higher levels (missile ammo should get bumped up a bit, maybe as much as an extra 25-50%) as well as greater range and projectile speed (where did i hear that? bombs go faster tho..) the only other real big attributes left for missiles are accuracy and damage..
_________________
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2005-06-19 11:05
I might even go with boosting the ammunition by 200 percent. Current missile ammo is far too easy to burn through. I dont think missiles will be often-used weapons if they run out of ammunition within the first 2 minutes of battle.
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Beast
Cadet
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: May 27, 2002
Posts: 345
From: Wouldnt you like to know
| Posted: 2005-06-19 11:26
Lets see somthing thats smaller then a fighter having trouble hitting a target that prolly atleast 9000 times its size????
Oh yea right.............................. we want massive ships as fighter jets!!!!!!!!!!. oh oh dont forget we want those missiles tobe weak to.................
/e roles his eyes
[ This Message was edited by: Beast on 2005-06-19 11:29 ]
_________________
|
Tael
2nd Rear Admiral
Palestar
Joined: July 03, 2002
Posts: 3697
From: San Francisco Bay Area
| Posted: 2005-06-19 15:48
Quote:
|
On 2005-06-19 11:05, RedXIII wrote:
I might even go with boosting the ammunition by 200 percent. Current missile ammo is far too easy to burn through. I dont think missiles will be often-used weapons if they run out of ammunition within the first 2 minutes of battle.
|
|
Supply ships
_________________
|
Coeus {NCX-Charger}
Admiral, I can't read,
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: February 16, 2004
Posts: 3635
From: South Philly
| Posted: 2005-06-19 17:57
can't be everywhere at once...
_________________
Darkspace: Twilight
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2005-06-19 21:21
Quote:
|
On 2005-06-19 17:57, Coeus [Recruiting] wrote:
can't be everywhere at once...
|
|
get more of 'em 
_________________
|
Lonectzn
Fleet Admiral
Joined: January 06, 2005
Posts: 202
| Posted: 2005-06-19 21:34
I don't think there's a problem with missiles at the moment. They are high damage long range weapons. That is why they are targetable, having such a large payload and engines/tracking computer. Torps on the other hand have a smaller payload, no engine or tracking computer (no longer track in beta, actually makes them more accurate  ).
Also we're not looking at some small 1-2 meter-long missile, these things are massive (easily as large as the fighters), and go very fast. That is why they are inaccurate vs small ships. They would be the equivalent of current long-range rockets.
[ This Message was edited by: Lonectzn on 2005-06-19 21:38 ]
_________________
|
Fatal Rocko Willis
Fleet Admiral
Fatal Squadron
Joined: March 01, 2003
Posts: 1336
From: Kentucky
| Posted: 2005-06-19 21:36
Quote:
|
On 2005-06-18 21:52, RedXIII wrote:
The Missile Dread, however, has all of it's missiles in forward-arc. A dessie just has to get behind a MD at close range to pwn it.
|
|
I agree totally on this one Red.... It has happened to me AND I have done it myself...
Quote:
|
But surely, Missiles would be a great anti-dessy weapon, as we need one badly since Beams are not very effective anymore.
|
|
Missiles are, or should at least be, a great anti-ship missile period. Currently in Release we have PCM's, IT's, Psi's and AR's..... Each one has its ups and downs but I think Beams are still very effective.
Quote:
|
PS: Rocko, missiles dont quite work that way in Darkspace.
|
|
Sure they do... I can out manuever all the missiles... though Psi's tend to be the hardest to evade IMO. I put the missiles on my 9 or 3 O'Clock position and right before impact I turn towards the missile while traveling full speed.... the missile overshoots about 90-95% of the time, harmlessly missing me. I have noticed that Psi's seem to have a close proximity type warhead... I know they have missed me but yet detonate and do damage yet the same.
Quote:
|
Not to mention if we based things off of Real life... not only would a missile have extremely high accuracy, but it could pwn just about anything in one hit. Including a ship. Why do you think cannons and ship-based torpedoes were scrapped for missiles missiles an more missiles?
|
|
I based ideas on Real Life™. True a missile would own a fighter if it was shot at BUT the modern day version of the DarkSpace Dreadnaught is the Iowa-class Battleships..... The Iowa-class Battleships could withstand multiple (ie, LARGE amounts) bomb hits before being severly damaged... I mean look at the Arizona.... It took multiple torpedo AND bomb hits before she sank... and even then her hull remained intack. The Iowa-class BB's were beleived, though this was never tested, to be able to withstand 6-8 Harppon missiles before her OUTER armour layer was breached... that's not including the normal armour that was included in that era under the main belt of armour next to the ships skin.
I still think the idea I mentioned above can work... this makes adding ECCM (Basically Active sensors) a very good thing... where as ECM (Active Jammer) a needed thing... THis can work and it is, if I somewhat understand the game, a rather simple implimentation.... You can have set shifts of the percentage for a given missile...
Look at it this way, and this takes into account of what JRE says...
PCM's are to me what the Tomahawk is.... Big Warhead, Great Tracking but Slow, very long range....
IT's are like Harpoons... Medium sized warhead, good tracking, and a little faster, long range
Psi are like Maverick or Hellfire... Slightly smaller warhead, good traking, little faster that IT's but shorter range.
AR are like HARM (High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile)... Smallest warhead, best tracking, extremely fast but shortest range.....
You can take this idea and say give each a basic number..(% chances for illustrative purposes only....)
AR = 90% chance to hit
Psi = 85% chance to hit
IT's = 80% chance to hit
PCM = 75% chance to hit
Now this percent chance could be shifted up or down based on a number of basic factors... ECM, ECCM, Speed of the Target ship vs. Speed of the Missile, Planetary bassed ECM or ECCM.... you can even take into effect the target angle vs. missile approach angle (High deflection shots = BAD).
I am not geting into "How many missiles whoud a ship carry" debate... I am more concerned with the implementaion of said missiles... right now missiles are good but unless you are using ECM to bomb or ECCM to see something thats all they are used for.. I am trying to mix things up a bit... Make the game a little more interesting WITHOUT having to add too much new content... The items I have spoken about are currently In-Game and this can also be modified very easily for Beta with its emergance of even more missiles.
I hope you can understand where I am taking this.... It will keep missiles in the game without making them Uber... they can hit you if you throw up massive active sensors (ECCM) but if you want to survive Real Life™ you need Active Jammers (ECM) to protect you. Maybe reward those who brave the MV when the bring in a Sensor ship to help attack or protect a fleet/planet.
What says you?
Rocko
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
