| Author |
Missile tracking |
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
|  Posted: 2012-04-28 08:35
if missiles had a fixed minimum rate of turning then they would hit so much more accurately...
like, turn rate = {0,25) degrees, so they either keep steady or aim at target
what was the reason for a dynamically calculated turning rate for missiles (and energy torpedo) anyway?
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
-Daedalus-
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 26, 2006
Posts: 549
| Posted: 2012-04-28 10:20
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-24 10:10, Pantheon wrote:
This will be a dev decision only. You can theorise your calculations to the nth degree, but we're only interested in server performance, which is why tracking is how it is now.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2012-04-24 10:11 ]
|
|
I love it, he even shoots down other staff members before the first suggestion is made. No wonder the game is failing.
_________________
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2012-04-28 10:49
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 10:20, -Daedalus- wrote:
I love it, he even shoots down other staff members before the first suggestion is made. No wonder the game is failing.
|
|
not a suggestion thread. its just a thought experiment, a probing analysis, a thoughtful review, a scientific description, of missile tracking.
its for non-game purposes. entertainment. spreading, gathering and analysing knowledge about the main topic - missiles in DS.
whether the developer's team (read:-Development Team) chooses to look at the thread, think about the thread, be inspired influenced and guided by the thread, and discuss with the team about the thread as a potentially useful and positive suggestion pot, is at their whim.
they arent asking for a suggestion, we arent giving a suggestion.
just gossiping over a glass of water, yo
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
Shade Perilous
Vice Admiral
Joined: September 16, 2011
Posts: 35
| Posted: 2012-04-28 11:24
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 10:20, -Daedalus- wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-24 10:10, Pantheon wrote:
This will be a dev decision only. You can theorise your calculations to the nth degree, but we're only interested in server performance, which is why tracking is how it is now.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2012-04-24 10:11 ]
|
|
I love it, he even shoots down other staff members before the first suggestion is made. No wonder the game is failing.
|
|
As Toby said Daed
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-24 09:54, Gejaheline wrote:
Disclaimer: I am not a dev, I am not asking for help on behalf of Palestar, this post if for entertainment purposes first and foremost.
|
|
Now, please really can i just read a thread without some creative whining. It is getting tiresome.
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-04-28 16:11
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 10:20, -Daedalus- wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-24 10:10, Pantheon wrote:
This will be a dev decision only. You can theorise your calculations to the nth degree, but we're only interested in server performance, which is why tracking is how it is now.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2012-04-24 10:11 ]
|
|
I love it, he even shoots down other staff members before the first suggestion is made. No wonder the game is failing.
|
|
It performance related, nothing to do with point of view or a suggestion. In all reality, Faustus is the only one who would ever remotely touch this code, as it is one of the most harmful to the server CPU-wise. If I made any radical changes, he'd likely revert them and call me an idiot, and that goes for any member of the dev team.
So you can go on your personal rant and spread your lies all you want, but the reality of it is, the dev team will make the decision based on how much it affects the server, which is why I said what I said.
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2012-04-28 19:15
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 10:20, -Daedalus- wrote:
I love it, he even shoots down other staff members before the first suggestion is made. No wonder the game is failing.
|
|
I never even intended to make a suggestion. All I'm trying to do is improve my understanding of game design and improve my coding skills by looking at a mildly interesting problem and seeing how it might be programmed, thus giving me an insight into some of the issues that DS developers might run into.
Thus, I wished to spark a brainstorming session in order to harvest ideas and suggestions from people who might be vaguely interested and/or technical in order to help me out.
The idea of contributing something that saves on CPU or is more accurate or whatever is not the objective here, which people seem to have missed.
---
Back on topic, I'll bet nobody knows what differential equation is used to predict interception points for projectiles...
Alas, it's not as simple as "see how long it'll take to hit target, aim that far ahead" because the time-to-target changes when you move the aimpoint, meaning you have to recalculate, and so on and so forth. There's a differential equation out there that works though, if I recall.
[ This Message was edited by: Gejaheline on 2012-04-28 19:58 ]
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-04-29 00:07
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-28 19:15, Gejaheline wrote:
Alas, it's not as simple as "see how long it'll take to hit target, aim that far ahead" because the time-to-target changes when you move the aimpoint, meaning you have to recalculate, and so on and so forth. There's a differential equation out there that works though, if I recall.
|
|
There's no equation out there in the world that can predict what your target will do in the next second, or the next second after that. Equations require at least some form of constants.
If your target ship changes direction or speed, your equation gets thrown out of the window and you have to recalculate. That's why the recalculating the lead point at a constant interval is probably the best/cheapest way to do it.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2012-04-29 01:13
why not ask the server for the target ships xy cords since this is a known value, and fly the missile to it
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Brutality
Marshal
Joined: May 25, 2009
Posts: 659
From: Alaska, USA
| Posted: 2012-04-29 01:18
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 01:13, Defiance*CO* wrote:
why not ask the server for the target ships xy cords since this is a known value, and fly the missile to it
|
|
wouldn't that change anyway if the targeted ship is moving?
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-04-29 03:17
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 01:13, Defiance*CO* wrote:
why not ask the server for the target ships xy cords since this is a known value, and fly the missile to it
|
|
This is what real life missiles do. They aim straight for the target.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Lithium
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 29, 2003
Posts: 109
| Posted: 2012-04-29 03:44
I've drawn a picture which way missile path shoude be.
Red is a target ship.
Green is a missile ship.
Orange is a current missile path.
Blue is a viable missile path.
_________________
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2012-04-29 04:00
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 01:13, Defiance*CO* wrote:
why not ask the server for the target ships xy cords since this is a known value, and fly the missile to it
|
|
exactly what i said.
removing the factor of guessing where the target is going to be after X seconds will actually make missiles more likely to hit a moving target, and maintain effectiveness against stationary targets.
@lithium that method can work for hitting nearby targets, but would increase the amount of calculations needed to guide the missile to target. also, doing that for hitting distant targets would waste fuel.
[ This Message was edited by: Toby D Syded on 2012-04-29 04:04 ]
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2012-04-29 09:38
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 00:07, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
There's no equation out there in the world that can predict what your target will do in the next second, or the next second after that. Equations require at least some form of constants.
If your target ship changes direction or speed, your equation gets thrown out of the window and you have to recalculate. That's why the recalculating the lead point at a constant interval is probably the best/cheapest way to do it.
|
|
Goodness, you're right, you can't predict precisely what the enemy will do in the next second, you pretty much have to assume they'll keep doing what they're currently doing.
This will cause you to miss a lot less often because it's infinitely less retarded than shooting at exactly where they currently are right this moment, which is where they will not be when your projectile arrives.
There is a formula for this, which is, if I'm not mistaken, currently used in DS for estimating the impact points for cannon fire and missile aimpoints. It's pretty accurate.
Since missiles can correct their path they have the added advantage of being able to recalculate that impact point as time goes by, saving fuel and making it harder for the enemy to evade. If the ships and missiles followed Newtonian mechanics, using predicted impact points would make them entirely undodgeable.
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 03:17, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
This is what real life missiles do. They aim straight for the target.
|
|
Let's ask Wikipedia:
Courtesy Wikimedia Commons, released under a Creative Commons license.
Seems like not all of them aim straight at the target...
[ This Message was edited by: Gejaheline on 2012-04-29 11:51 ]
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2012-04-29 11:12
It's very simple.
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was.
The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-04-29 11:39
Quote:
|
On 2012-04-29 11:12, Fattierob wrote:
It's very simple.
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was.
The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
|
|
Have my babies.
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
