Author |
Missile tracking |
NoBoDx Grand Admiral
Joined: October 14, 2003 Posts: 784 From: Germany / NRW
| Posted: 2012-04-25 15:57  
dont know if this would break the server, but i a missile tries every second or two to point at a target the hit-chance would become a lot higher
but a missile can only turn x degrees and if the target moves too fast the missle would miss / overshoot it (good for smaler ships, bad for bigger ones)
from a logical pow this might be the best solution
but i have no idea of the servers feelings, if he have to keep track of 100... 200 missles
_________________ The only good 'ooman is a dead 'ooman. An' da only fing better than a dead 'ooman'z a dyin' 'ooman who tell you where ter find 'is mates.
|
Blackjack [DBL] Grand Admiral Faster than Light
Joined: February 25, 2011 Posts: 344 From: The land of venomous reptiles.
| Posted: 2012-04-25 16:22  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-25 08:00, Enterprise wrote:
I would personally prefer that things like Missiles become massive area of effect weapons.
Essentially, they would have poor tracking, but have incredible AoE, yet, up to -90% damage at the edge, to full damage within close range.
This way, we don't have to focus so much on tracking, as on balancing the damage. This way also, missiles become effective cluster damage weapons without the unneccessary processing power that goes into tracking.
|
|
So basically you want to forget tracking and just throw a nuke. This would be rather dangerous to friendly assault ships, especially the more fragile Luth ones. while they will be further out of this bubble, it would still hurt them. Also if they have such a massive splash area, PD would have its effectiveness reduced. (small ships already had this issue with the Harpexes splash)
This might be a bit complicated to put in, but I think but shooting the missile down would cause the missile to have a reduced damage, because the warhead didn't detonate properly. Though this idea will result in needing more than one damage value (hit or shot down)
_________________
Names I used: Da Bes Loser, Perseverance, Loyalty.
|
Fluttershy Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 24, 2011 Posts: 778 From: Fluttershy
| Posted: 2012-04-25 18:16  
Guys... again, what if we just got rid of missiles entirely?
Instead of light high-tracking missiles, you'd have high velocity flack cannons, a core weapon with reverse falloff, and a large radius, but low damage.
The user would need to manually detonate the flak if they miss, increasing the interactivity of the task.
Instead of heavy low-tracking missiles, you'd have low velocity projectiles with a small radius, but higher and more focused damage.
This would be similar to torpedoes, with the exception that they do more damage at long range, and next to nothing at close range.
Because you can't PD projectiles, the damage would need to be adjusted accordingly, but wouldn't this system still act in the role of long-range support without all the trouble that missiles cause? (desync, instakills, lag, poor reliability, completely overpowered or completely useless, AI being able to PD what they shouldn't see)
_________________
|
Pantheon Marshal Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001 Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-04-25 19:02  
I think we've moved away from Geja's topic a little...
Might have a fix for missile tracking, have to wait for beta to be back up and on an up-to-date build tho.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo Marshal Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010 Posts: 3823 From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-04-25 23:29  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-25 16:22, Loyalty *TO* wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-25 08:00, Enterprise wrote:
I would personally prefer that things like Missiles become massive area of effect weapons.
Essentially, they would have poor tracking, but have incredible AoE, yet, up to -90% damage at the edge, to full damage within close range.
This way, we don't have to focus so much on tracking, as on balancing the damage. This way also, missiles become effective cluster damage weapons without the unneccessary processing power that goes into tracking.
|
|
So basically you want to forget tracking and just throw a nuke. This would be rather dangerous to friendly assault ships, especially the more fragile Luth ones. while they will be further out of this bubble, it would still hurt them. Also if they have such a massive splash area, PD would have its effectiveness reduced. (small ships already had this issue with the Harpexes splash)
This might be a bit complicated to put in, but I think but shooting the missile down would cause the missile to have a reduced damage, because the warhead didn't detonate properly. Though this idea will result in needing more than one damage value (hit or shot down)
|
|
Don't PCMs already have this huge splash damage?
_________________ ... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Talien Marshal Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010 Posts: 2044 From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-04-26 11:09  
All T3 missiles have huge splash. At least human T3 missiles do, not 100% sure about luth.
_________________ Adapt or die.
|
Iwancoppa Fleet Admiral
Joined: November 15, 2008 Posts: 709
| Posted: 2012-04-26 18:41  
If missiles are so laggy to the server,
why cant the computation be done client-side?
_________________
|
Talien Marshal Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010 Posts: 2044 From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-04-26 20:08  
Because if calculations like that were done clientside you'd see desnych return with a vengeance, bringing a horde of thousands of it's clones hell bent on nothing less than a complete takeover the DS universe.
_________________ Adapt or die.
|
Walrus of Apathy Admiral Templar Knights
Joined: August 07, 2005 Posts: 466 From: Dorans Basement
| Posted: 2012-04-26 20:20  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-26 20:08, Talien wrote:
Because if calculations like that were done clientside you'd see desnych return with a vengeance, bringing a horde of thousands of it's clones hell bent on nothing less than a complete takeover the DS universe.
|
|
I fail to see the problem with this.
Really though, Missiles really ought to be more effective for the effort it takes to get them accurate and past PD. I'm in the prelimenary process of thinking up my theories on how the DS weapon system should work, but it's just my opinion of course.
_________________
|
Pantheon Marshal Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001 Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-04-26 20:26  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-26 20:20, Walrus of Apathy wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-26 20:08, Talien wrote:
Because if calculations like that were done clientside you'd see desnych return with a vengeance, bringing a horde of thousands of it's clones hell bent on nothing less than a complete takeover the DS universe.
|
|
I fail to see the problem with this.
Really though, Missiles really ought to be more effective for the effort it takes to get them accurate and past PD. I'm in the prelimenary process of thinking up my theories on how the DS weapon system should work, but it's just my opinion of course.
|
|
If it was done client side, it could be hacked, so thats a no-go (in addition to the massive sync issues). The computation was correct, but from what I can see, it wasn't taking client latency into account, which would throw a spanner into the works due to the nature of how we handle movement.
Please bare in mind that no other game in the world tracks things like we do - everything is real time and not pre-rolled, so any client computation is out of the question for security reasons.
Next beta update should improve things
_________________
|
Gejaheline Fleet Admiral Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005 Posts: 1127 From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2012-04-27 08:02  
Wow, I look away for five minutes and the thread totally derails.
In case it wasn't clear to start with, I was looking for contributions from a technical/mathematical/programmatic point of view, NOT for suggestions like "replace missiles with guns" or "turn off bits of the server". The original idea was to harvest suggestions that I could use to create a crude simulation as a proof-of-concept to show that alternative guidance methods might work.
Now, this is all for my own, personal entertainment, since I'm convinced that the actual code that tells the missiles which way to point is working fine but the missile's ability to aim at that point isn't working optimally, which is a subtly different problem.
Thus far I have worked out how NOT to use the tan() function and am working out how to do angular velocity calculations.
_________________ [Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
*FTL*Soulless Marshal
Joined: June 25, 2010 Posts: 787 From: Dres-Kona
| Posted: 2012-04-27 16:41  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-27 08:02, Gejaheline wrote:
Wow, I look away for five minutes and the thread totally derails.
In case it wasn't clear to start with, I was looking for contributions from a technical/mathematical/programmatic point of view, NOT for suggestions like "replace missiles with guns" or "turn off bits of the server". The original idea was to harvest suggestions that I could use to create a crude simulation as a proof-of-concept to show that alternative guidance methods might work.
Now, this is all for my own, personal entertainment, since I'm convinced that the actual code that tells the missiles which way to point is working fine but the missile's ability to aim at that point isn't working optimally, which is a subtly different problem.
Thus far I have worked out how NOT to use the tan() function and am working out how to do angular velocity calculations.
|
|
Angular velocity is the rate of change of angular displacement
W= Omega
Average angular Velocity: W = delta theta (change angular displacement) OVER Delta Time (change in time)
instantaneous angular velocity: W= Theta OVER time
other questions feel free to ask or give WolfRam alpha a shot
Angular displacement is measured in radians rather than degrees. This is because it provides a very simple relationship between distance traveled around the circle and the distance r from the centre.
Theta= Arc length Over radius of the circle
For example if an object rotates 360 degrees around a circle radius r the angular displacement is given by the distance traveled the circumference which is 2ðr Divided by the radius in: which easily simplifies to . Therefore 1 revolution is radians.
[ This Message was edited by: Soulless. on 2012-04-27 16:54 ]
_________________ We are Back from the shadows.
|
Kenny_Naboo Marshal Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010 Posts: 3823 From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-04-28 00:30  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-27 08:02, Gejaheline wrote:
Wow, I look away for five minutes and the thread totally derails.
In case it wasn't clear to start with, I was looking for contributions from a technical/mathematical/programmatic point of view, NOT for suggestions like "replace missiles with guns" or "turn off bits of the server". The original idea was to harvest suggestions that I could use to create a crude simulation as a proof-of-concept to show that alternative guidance methods might work.
Now, this is all for my own, personal entertainment, since I'm convinced that the actual code that tells the missiles which way to point is working fine but the missile's ability to aim at that point isn't working optimally, which is a subtly different problem.
Thus far I have worked out how NOT to use the tan() function and am working out how to do angular velocity calculations.
|
|
I may have a simpler suggestion over complex mathematical models.
Every ship already calculates the lead when you fire your weaps. That lead calculation takes into account the target's speed and heading. Why not incorporate that into the missile and have the missile refresh that calculation every second and readjust its heading (limited to its rate of turn, of course).
_________________ ... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Fluttershy Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 24, 2011 Posts: 778 From: Fluttershy
| Posted: 2012-04-28 01:39  
That's kinda how I did missile tracking for one of my games.
I don't know how to do the math required, so I was just having it target a point some distance in front of the object, multiplied by the distance and the relative speed between the missile and the target.
It was really rough, but it worked, and made the AI ships sometimes miss their shots in a way that seemed like human error. (guns were aimed manually with mouse clicks)
[ This Message was edited by: Fluttershy on 2012-04-28 01:43 ]
_________________
|
Pantheon Marshal Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001 Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-04-28 07:44  
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 00:30, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-27 08:02, Gejaheline wrote:
Wow, I look away for five minutes and the thread totally derails.
In case it wasn't clear to start with, I was looking for contributions from a technical/mathematical/programmatic point of view, NOT for suggestions like "replace missiles with guns" or "turn off bits of the server". The original idea was to harvest suggestions that I could use to create a crude simulation as a proof-of-concept to show that alternative guidance methods might work.
Now, this is all for my own, personal entertainment, since I'm convinced that the actual code that tells the missiles which way to point is working fine but the missile's ability to aim at that point isn't working optimally, which is a subtly different problem.
Thus far I have worked out how NOT to use the tan() function and am working out how to do angular velocity calculations.
|
|
I may have a simpler suggestion over complex mathematical models.
Every ship already calculates the lead when you fire your weaps. That lead calculation takes into account the target's speed and heading. Why not incorporate that into the missile and have the missile refresh that calculation every second and readjust its heading (limited to its rate of turn, of course).
|
|
That's how it currently works.
_________________
|