Vega Strike Forums

Elsewhere I mentioned leach and EMP weapons:

travists wrote:In my mind leach weapons puts a load on the shields drawing them down, then draining your primary and SPEC capacitors, and finally kills the reactor temporarily by "simulating an imminent field collapse triggering an emergency shutdown and reset" which also kills the flight computer while EMP kills the flight comp. and deals varying amounts of damage to electrical systems while leaving armor untouched.

• Does this sound reasonable?
• How long should a ship be disabled for?
• What does it look like? (May have found a use for that Shiva Star thing I found.
• What other "special" damage types should there be?
• (More for those that know the code.) Is/would it possible to have weapons deal varying damage vs. armor, shields, shield tech other than just phase and non-phase?
• Tractor/repulsor beams seem nearly inadequate, but I'm not sure what needs to be done.
• Any objections to adding recoil on big guns?

travists wrote: [*]How long should a ship be disabled for?

Even the shortest time you can think of (a minute?) is a lot in battles.

travists wrote: [*]What does it look like? (May have found a use for that Shiva Star thing I found.

I've been thinking about the need to add more visual damage feedback. It's good eye candy, but it's also functional (you know you're hitting your target).

travists wrote: [*](More for those that know the code.) Is/would it possible to have weapons deal varying damage vs. armor, shields, shield tech other than just phase and non-phase?

Sure. It's a chore, but I don't expect it to be too difficult.

travists wrote: [*]Tractor/repulsor beams seem nearly inadequate, but I'm not sure what needs to be done.

So, start by telling us what is inadequate about them?

travists wrote: [*]Any objections to adding recoil on big guns?[/list]

The point?

Ship's computer will just compensate firing thrusters, and even if it couldn't, it's not such a big thing to be worth it. It would be extremely easy in physics, but... again... the point? Because the task of loading the information about the amount of recoil each weapon generates wouldn't be at all small.

Tractors seem pathetic in range, power, and control. At least to me. I'm certainly not looking for anything quick either. I'm hoping for a rather robust discussion on "alternative weapon effects"

As for the length of effect, I can think of some rather short time frames. Picoseconds come to mind (one trillionth of a second). My opinion on the matter is if a leach or strong emp weapon is to be taken seriously, it needs to effectively neutralize your target. Now they may well (and likely should) have various amounts of drain they can deliver, thus determining just how dead they leave their victim.

Part of my thought on different damage amounts depending on what they hit is that some systems likely do far more damage to something solid like armor than something less tangible like shields or vies versa.

klauss wrote:

travists wrote:[*]Tractor/repulsor beams seem nearly inadequate, but I'm not sure what needs to be done.

So, start by telling us what is inadequate about them?

How about force dependant on the relative velocity, asymptotically reaching certain value, e.g. pulsespeed or proportional?

klauss wrote:

travists wrote:[*]Any objections to adding recoil on big guns?[/list]

The point?
Ship's computer will just compensate firing thrusters, and even if it couldn't, it's not such a big thing to be worth it. It would be extremely easy in physics, but... again... the point? Because the task of loading the information about the amount of recoil each weapon generates wouldn't be at all small.

Er, since exit velocity is already here, we only need to know mass, so one more field in weapon data, weapon XML and bolt/ball data. Momentum adjustment in the firing function, momentum adjustment on the receiving side in damage function.
Each of these is 2-3 straightforward lines (field and init, data reading "optimizer") in an obvious place.
What else? A few tons of thrust is not much - more of turning momentum - but why not.

TBeholder wrote:

klauss wrote:

travists wrote:[*]Tractor/repulsor beams seem nearly inadequate, but I'm not sure what needs to be done.

So, start by telling us what is inadequate about them?

How about force dependant on the relative velocity, asymptotically reaching certain value, e.g. pulsespeed or proportional?

I don't follow...

TBeholder wrote:Er, since exit velocity is already here, we only need to know mass, so one more field in weapon data, weapon XML and bolt/ball data. Momentum adjustment in the firing function, momentum adjustment on the receiving side in damage function.
Each of these is 2-3 straightforward lines (field and init, data reading "optimizer") in an obvious place.
What else? A few tons of thrust is not much - more of turning momentum - but why not.

Like I said, adding the physics part, not such a big deal. But maintaining a new value (mass) in the dataset is a hassle. You say "Why not?". I say "Why yes?". Does it provide any measurable gameplay improvement? I cannot see any. If you can show us one, sure, add the feature request and it would be worked on.

klauss wrote:

TBeholder wrote: How about force dependant on the relative velocity, asymptotically reaching certain value, e.g. pulsespeed or proportional?

I don't follow...

So the tractor instead of fixed force, i. e. just accelerate everything indefinitely reversely proportional to their mass, exerts a variable force, accelerating everything up to certain velocity (relative to the tractor). The main diference is that you can give them formidable enough force for moving heavy stuff, and very light objects still don't suffer hypervelocity tractor-slinging.
Perhaps, as an option.

klauss wrote: Like I said, adding the physics part, not such a big deal. But maintaining a new value (mass) in the dataset is a hassle. You say "Why not?". I say "Why yes?". Does it provide any measurable gameplay improvement? I cannot see any. If you can show us one, sure, add the feature request and it would be worked on.

More physical meaning to ships and parts. Turning forces, for one, suggest placing more recoily guns closer to the axis, or at very least balancing them, as opposed to slapping "Tractor capability" to any Light mount having exactly the same result.
For a modern hardware example, GSh-6-30 gives 3.3 tons of average thrust (0.39 kg * 845 m/s * 6000RPM / 60sec). That's for full cycle, so instant forces are big. Granted, VS massdrivers don't buzz 100 shots per second, but they hurl more considerable mass. A gnat's kick for big ships, but not little enough to ignore for small craft.
On the receiving end, missiles hit by Hephaestus PD or Stormfire (currently, 1 hit isn't enough to kill), or torpedo / drone / light fighter hit by massdrivers would be at least knocked aside in addition to damage. Also, purely kinetic part of the damage may be made dependent on the projectile's relative velocity.

Applying torque on weapon hits, I believe, was implemented at some point and then disabled.
Not sure why.

klauss wrote:Applying torque on weapon hits, I believe, was implemented at some point and then disabled.
Not sure why.

To save on tracking exact hit locations (otherwise it doesn't make sense)?

BTW, returning to recoil. Assuming damage is kinetic-only, m = 2*E/v^2 = 2*D*Kd/v^2 where Kd=kilojoules_per_unit_damage*1000=5400000j.
Micro-driver, m = 2×15.5×5400000j÷(4000 m/s)^2 ~ 10.5 kg; Mini-driver : 26.9 kg slugs. Hephaestus PD : 0.19 kg. Makes sense. Stormfire: 2.8 kg. At 1000 RPS (okay, it's really down to physical frames, but still)... now that one got to have warheads.

Properly managed, recoil can have some intriguing game play effects. If a relatively low mass fighter mounts the largest cannons it can and releases a full salvo, it may have a similar effect as if they had suddenly turned around and hit the afterburners! A modern example would be the US's A-10. Fire the main gun full force for any length of time and the craft momentary stops. While I was not thinking of impact force, it too has an interesting application: the fly swatter. Picture a kinetic energy weapon mounted on a cap ship. when fired, the cap ship little more than rocks, but a fighter hit by it will be damaged and sent tumbling out of control!

TBeholder wrote:

klauss wrote:Applying torque on weapon hits, I believe, was implemented at some point and then disabled.
Not sure why.

To save on tracking exact hit locations (otherwise it doesn't make sense)?

Is it such a bad thing to use approximated hit locations?

In any case, when we add physical locations to the upgrades and make them damageable when hit, we'll need precise hit locations.

klauss wrote:Is it such a bad thing to use approximated hit locations?

Well, with rotation it becomes "in which direction", so...

klauss wrote:In any case, when we add physical locations to the upgrades and make them damageable when hit, we'll need precise hit locations.

My point, exactly.

klauss wrote:Applying torque on weapon hits, I believe, was implemented at some point and then disabled.

Re-enable it!

Deus Siddis wrote:

klauss wrote:Applying torque on weapon hits, I believe, was implemented at some point and then disabled.

Re-enable it!

This sounds neat. It makes weapon mass significant, both offensively and defensively, relative to the mass of the player's ship.

A seldom used, but interesting, application would be if your thrusters are shot out you could limp to a base by repeatedly shooting your cannons in the opposite direction of the base. Though, after bailing out if your ship is still intact it would be better to have the option to have it tractored in. Thus the above would only be because you where messing around.

Also, a significant recoil may hinder "jousting" for light ships, which pushes them from low-energy kinetic weapons toward less energy efficient light/no -reaction weapons and big caps.
I.e. adds another tactical consideration, and functional divergence since interceptors dealing with incoming threats to their carrier don't need to joust much (and can rearm quickly, so small magazines aren't a problem), thus they still may optimize for more power this way.