Weapon enhancer enhancements

[PM]

* Weapon enhancers should have idle power use just like weapons.
With this, enhancers use full power only while an affected weapon is firing.

* Enhancer power use should be multiplied by the number of affected weapons fired.
For example, if a ship has a laser collimator and five linked laser weapons, then when all five lasers fire, collimator power use should be five times as normal.

I considered adding powerups that alter the beams fired by a weapon. For instance, a beam weapon that fired lasers by default. Then, the player finds a particle power core (like ammo, but isn't consumed when used, and is installed and functions like a weapon enhancer), installs it, and the beam weapon fires particle beams instead of lasers. Later, the player finds an ion or positron power core, and that beam weapon upgrades to fire ion or positron beams. While this can be done now, the main problem is that ships with multiple linked weapon slots can use one power core enhancer to enhance multiple weapons, but only pay the power used by the enhancer once, instead of once per affected weapon fired. The reason for this idea is I can add fewer weapons that share power sources instead of adding dozens of weapons whose only difference is the tech level, damage stats, and powerUse.

[shanejfilomena]

i think your onto something. I am sure the fuel depot will love the idea: but it does seem more realistic.
* side note on a recent experience of devices / fuel use :
Pioneer Alpha 20 : fuel use : I can not find a nice word for it : they do not have as good fuel/reactor balance that transcendence does in my opinion: I keep dying in my Turtle on the way to Saturn ..... sux.
but it does relate to this because weapons, shields : power draw .... plus etc, etc... and there is no manual refuel : so carry all the fuel you want you still die in the Turtle.
The Asp explorer is better but once your fighting your dying of fuel use so there is no win situation if you don't balance the reactor/ fuel .

** I think I am tired : I have not flown Alpha 20 in months.

[Schnobs]

* Weapon enhancers should have idle power use just like weapons.
With this, enhancers use full power only while an affected weapon is firing.

I second the motion.
Actually, this was one of the things I was after when I asked for "convenience functions" to power up devices only when needed.

[WillyTheSquid]

* Weapon enhancers should have idle power use just like weapons.
With this, enhancers use full power only while an affected weapon is firing.

I second the motion.
Actually, this was one of the things I was after when I asked for "convenience functions" to power up devices only when needed.

Thirded.

[FourFire]

* Weapon enhancers should have idle power use just like weapons.
With this, enhancers use full power only while an affected weapon is firing.

I second the motion.
Actually, this was one of the things I was after when I asked for "convenience functions" to power up devices only when needed.

Thirded.

This makes sense and would not be imbalanced, I support!

[Vachtra]

This sounds more like a flaw in linked weapons.
Personally I don't think an enhancer should be able to affect more than one weapon at a time. I always imagined the enhancer to be an item the weapon had to fire through for it to work. Firing 5 lasers through one device at the same time doesn't seem feasable.
As far as the item having idle power time again it seems more like a field that when passed through enhances the shot fired. If there were idle time then the machine would probably slow the firing rate down as it puts the field back up. At a 50% enhancement it doesn't seem unreasonable.
If you have actual down time then just turn it off for a little while while you aren't using it.

[Vachtra]

A note about the beam type enhancers.
Why would somene use an enhancer rather than another weapon? The only up side seems to be the lack of needing a station.
In practice you can't just put a particle accelerator in a laser cannon body and expect it to be able to take it. More probably you would destroy your weapon or it just wouldn't fire.
If you reversed the process, firing lasers from an x-ray laser cannon, it would be weaker but still might not work with the hardware.
This doesn't even take into account the powwer requirements.

If on the other hand you had a particle source and brought it to a tinker with several laser cannons it would be more likely that he could make a particle cannon for you.

[PM]

Why would someone use an enhancer rather than another weapon?

1) An interchangable part that can work with multiple weapons. I can make fewer base weapons and upgrade modules instead of dozens of weapons that vary only by damage (type), level, powerUse, and value. In short, X+Y items instead of X*Y items.

2) An alternative upgrade path that lets the player keep a weapon longer if he upgrades the parts.

[Vachtra]

That sounds a lot more like a device rather than an enhancement. (I'm thinking enhancements being things like the kenetic upgrade, Powerups) Mucn like a laser colometer, or however you spell that word, where you pass the shot through it or it's powered by the shot.
Of course you would then again have to install that. If there was a way to supress the first shot and then do an onfire event only with a specific weapon type or types if you want more than one weapon type able to use it then it might work.
If you are wanting one gun able to fire many types of "ammo" then I would expect that kind of weapon to have a few restrictions that would still make it iffy at best.
Restrictions that I would expect it to have would be as follows:
1. Multiple slots due to size and need of easy access to add or change "ammo". Possibly needing the launcher slot. (Launchers only need one slot but they also have very limited ammo types. A multi launcher I would expect to use more slots also. This is mainly for game balance.
2. Increased power use relative to comparable weapons of the same power and capability.
3. High level item. Pricy.
4. Probably military.
5. Your enemies would need to be using it too and do it well. Probably the hardest part of the coding.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but what I read is this:

1) An interchangable part that can work with multiple weapons. I can make fewer base weapons and upgrade modules instead of dozens of weapons that vary only by damage (type), level, powerUse, and value. In short, X+Y items instead of X*Y items.

An interchangable part: Something that can be installed and uninstalled. A device.
make fewer base weapons: These weapons already exist and the current powerups give them a wide spread of usefulness.
Breaking down the though it almost sounds like you want device slots for weapons you can install without a base.

2) An alternative upgrade path that lets the player keep a weapon longer if he upgrades the parts.

Keep a weapon longer if he upgrades the parts: Player gets to fire a weapon and the weapon changes type after upgrade. Sounds like getting a new weapon. If it's a powerup then the %damage powerups won't work after that or that powerup won't work if it's already powered up with %damage adjusters. Seems more like a down side.

I think I'm going back to game balance here. What it boils down to is you're trying to get more weapons on a ship, circumventing the slot limitation.

[PM]

That sounds a lot more like a device rather than an enhancement.

Weapon enhancers ARE devices. Enhancements for enhancers as stated by the title means feature requests for enhancer devices, not adding damage or speed mods to items (provided by ROMs or other consumable).

The idea of parts, is I could use several base weapons. One base is a rapid-fire, another is a spread gun, another is a slow, heavy polyhit shot (ala Quake2 railgun), another is a shockwave. In other words, various basic types common to many shm'ups. Without enhancers, these could fire a low strength laser or kinetic attack. With enhancer devices, the attack could be upgraded to higher powered laser/kinetic or higher damage type like particle/blast. One weapon enhancer would be compatible with multiple base weapon types. Thus, X+Y instead of X*Y items (or X+Y+Z instead of X*Y*Z).

Circumventing limits like powerUse or slot type, or one device upgrading linked fire every weapon without additional powerUse, are side effects. This is why I have not implemented this idea in a mod (except for the one positron->antimatter converter quest item in Items912). Thus, I wrote the first post of this topic.

[Vachtra]

I think I see what you're talking about now.
I had a similar but not so elaborate idea once but it was ship and device slot based, wouldn't work with the game setup at the time but I think things have been revised a little.
Maybe if you could make a weapon that inherits properties of an item and to change the weapon type you have to use it and select the weapon you want from your cargo hold. Not sure how it would track if you sold it or not after that.
That way you have an initial weapon but it changes with the use command. Is that even possible?

[FourFire]

We should enhance weapon enhancers with the standard equipment, energy costs should be added on as a perweaponfire event-penalty and no more need be said of it.

[Vachtra]

Nothing more? Really? I still think it should be just as it is... Who's to say how these devices really work except the guy who made them.