We need to take a look at WMD balance across levels

Post ideas & suggestions you have pertaining to the game here.
Militia Commander
Militia Commander
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:41 pm
Location: repairing armor

Sun Jan 03, 2016 6:24 am

Atarlost wrote:The way internal structure works currently EVERY weapon needs WMD unless it puts out at least two shots every 3 ticks on average, doesn't damage armor at all anyways (like EMP), has a particle type (since the particles bug supersedes WMD effects), or has some special effect of power similar to WMD (disintegration, radiation, or maybe device disruption).

Not having WMD is not okay unless internal structure is going to stop caring about WMD.
I think this makes sense for forward-firing weapons that don't have a spread, since it's hard to hit anything with them except for capital ships.

There may be uses for weapons without WMD if we make logical tradeoffs. For example, it would be great to see an omni that fires at a normal rate, but right now that's not balanced (the discussion about the EI500 re-emphasizes that). If most weapons had mid to high WMD but the omni only had WMD1 or WMD2, though, that would make the omni different in a way that's interesting. The EI500, for example, could use an omni that's actually good at killing powerful gunships while having to mount a different weapon to kill compartments.

Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 2338
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:54 am

Sun Jan 03, 2016 7:37 pm

The main reason not to use WMD, when you have a choice, is you do not blow up wrecks by accident if you shoot too much. Either the wreck has volatiles (fuel and ammo), or is so flimsy that the damage can shatter it.

@ gunship256: I tried to keep stats for PSD6 ships as close to the source as possible (there is a difference between EI100 and EI100/M), and do a few tweaks if appropriate and does not deviate from original stats, or to make a ship playable. (For example, Hornet playership gets just enough cargo space to hold a cargo hold.) I plan to continue this for PSD7 once I resume work on it.
Download and Play in 1.8 Beta...
Drake Technologies (Alpha): More hardware for combat in parts 1 and 2!
Godmode v3 (WIP): Dev/cheat tool compatible with D&O parts 1 or 2.
Download and Play in 1.7...
Star Castle Arcade: Relive classic arcade gaming in a new Transcendence adventure!
Playership Drones v7 (Beta): (OUTDATED!) Acquire and command almost any ship in Stars of the Pilgrim or Eternity Port.
Work in progress... Playership Drones v8: On hiatus!

Militia Commander
Militia Commander
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 11:41 pm
Location: repairing armor

Mon Jan 25, 2016 4:50 am

I made a mod that attempts to address the concerns about omnidirectionality quoted below. It presents three alternatives: (1) swivel which automatically reduces in degree as heavier weapons are installed (loses a slot, and launcher receives no swivel), (2) an omni launcher (loses a slot), and (3) full weapon omnidirectionality (loses two slots, and no launcher can be installed).

I'd be interested in hearing feedback, especially about how the mod could be adjusted for balance.

I realize this is not directly relavant to WMD, so I created a new thread here:
JohnBWatson wrote:Weight limit. Howitzers and heavy weaponry should definitely be excluded. I've made the suggestion of a weight limit for generic weapon slots before, but for omnidirectional turret slots it's an absolute must.
Kourtious wrote:About Turrets, couldn't the possibility of players owning a turret module be spectacular?
Atarlost wrote:The freighter's start is bad because there are few low level devices.

The answer isn't giving the EI500 an omni slot. The answer is increasing the variety of good high and especially low level non-weapon devices. And probably not making the player identify them, or at least not the low level ones.
AssumedPseudonym wrote:I have to agree. I’ve seen what a freighter whose only weapon slot is omnidirectional can do with an applicable enhancer device: It borders on obscene, even on a freighter with worse handling than the EI500.

User avatar
Commonwealth Pilot
Commonwealth Pilot
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:06 pm

Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:31 am

Another thing to consider when designing omnidirectional weapons is recoil. With sufficiently high recoil, any weapon could damage the ship it's installed on. This would only be exacerbated by installing it on an omnidirectional mount. Traditional ships might be reinforced to withstand the forces from firing a weapon along the longitudinal axis, but firing such a weapon along the lateral axis might dislocate the weapon and collapse any internal compartments near it.

From this point of view, it shouldn't be possible for a ship to mount howitzers on an omnidirectional mount at all unless the ship itself was designed with omnidirectional howitzers in mind. There shouldn't be omnidirectional versions of howitzers at all, and all ships should have some kind of limit on the maximum recoil of weapons that they can install.

Instead of having higher level versions of howitzers that were modified to be mounted on an omnidirectional turret, there should be higher level versions of howitzers that were modified to be recoilless. Since this alone might not be enough to justify having a company sell a separate version of the weapon (or for the weapon to be a higher level), These recoilless upgrades would be paired with a swivel mount. The swivel mount would be limited by the extra bulk in the weapon design (not just mass but also volume).

I think that a balanced swivel limit for "omnidirectional" versions of weapon would be:

standard weapon -> omnidirectional/swivel version of weapon
0 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 360 degree swivel at level(n+1)
1 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 180 degree swivel at level(n+1)
2 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 45 degree swivel at level(n+1)
3 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 20 degree swivel at level(n+1)
4 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 10 degree swivel at level(n+1)
5 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 7 degree swivel at level(n+1)
6 recoil at level(n) -> 0 recoil + 5 degree swivel at level(n+1)

Where the effective swivel value for weapons initially designed with recoil would be 360/(2 * recoil^2) since according to the wiki entry on recoil:
The Wiki wrote:"The acceleration is proportional to the square of the [recoil] value"
There could also be tracking versions of weapons as an alternative to omnidirectional versions but balance aside; those would require much more effort from their manufacturers to design than sticking the weapon on an omnidirectional mount would.
Cabbage Corp, the only mod with cabbages!

Please feel free to submit bug reports or issues related to the Cabbage Corp mod on the GitHub page, the forum thread, in a private message or even on the Xelerus page. Suggestions are fine too.

User avatar
Fleet Officer
Fleet Officer
Posts: 1452
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:17 pm

Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:50 am

I think the best way to balance omnidirectional capacity for gunship weapons would be a range nerf. It makes sense in practical terms, as(matter based, at least) weapons seem to have a maximum range because the margin of error in initial trajectory would eventually result in a distance from the expected target that is much too great to reliably hit anything. With an omni mount small enough to be installed on a wolfen, there is less stability, so weapons can't be expected to keep a reliable trajectory quite as well.

In terms of gameplay, it would get rid of the main issue with balancing omnidirectionality, as instead of trying to balance the offensive bonus of being able to fire constantly without aiming and the defensive bonus of being able to put all of one's effort into dodging with a raw DPS penalty, it would trade them off for the defensive disadvantage of having to stay in close range, and the offensive disadvantage of losing the ability to get the jump on foes from a distance.

This would also create a genuine difference between normal weapons mounted omnidirectionally on capships and a gunship's omnidirectional weapon, while creating a more interesting mechanic for omnidirectionality than the present setup of battles becoming a lot easier but taking much longer.

Post Reply