Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Author Topic: about missiles  (Read 2763 times)

GenericGoose

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
about missiles
« on: January 28, 2021, 02:40:47 PM »

I've noticed the squall targeting changes and phase ship AI reworks in the upcoming update (can't wait for it!) and have a few related ideas. One thing that I really dislike about phase ships is the AI ships love wasting missiles on phase ships they can't possibly hit. They routinely waste hurricane missiles and you can even bait enemies into wasting reaper missiles. Another thing is overkill - AI loves to absolutely nuke lone frigates with 5 hurricanes, instead of firing into a group or a bulkier target. I suppose that might be an issue with missile targeting. Either way, I think AI and missiles could use some better target evaluation, because right now it feels like AI is misusing most missile weapons way too much, outside of a few (locust, hurricane, pilum, annihilator, sabot are good), due to the sheer volume of projectiles, fighters, PD, poor targeting and limited ammunition, unless you have a full fleet of missile ships, in which case quantity wins. Meanwhile, carriers get essentially unlimited missiles and arguably a better way of delivering them (tridents are insane).
I'd say these are also the reason the singular torpedoes are fairly useless? The AI will likely use them up on the first ship they meet, likely a complete waste. They are way too generous with missiles, spamming them, instead of using them more conservatively to tactically destroy high-value targets. I suppose that could be a sort of weapon setting?
« Last Edit: January 28, 2021, 02:54:47 PM by GenericGoose »
Logged

Mach56

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2021, 02:53:39 PM »

I really feel like the hurricane really should get the STRIKE tag, as it rarely ever hits frigates.
Logged

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1458
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2021, 01:20:58 AM »

This is one of the reasons (arguably the biggest one) I prefer missiles to regenerate.

The AI can be "gamed" into using missiles in situations which effectively waste them. Which the encourages the player to not attack anything "properly" until this ritual has been completed, and the AI has no more missiles.
Whether this is accomplished by clever manoeuvring or by deliberately sacrificing ships, the result is the same: The AI is de-fanged, and rendered noticably less dangerous.
I am not a fan of this kind of "metagame" stuff in a single player game.

When missiles never technically run out the AI can still be made vulnerable, but it's a window rather than a permanent state past a given point. And if it stuffs things up as in the examples provided, if it survives it can come back and have another go.

Note: This is very much a niche view, and is unikely to ever be anything but.
Logged

GenericGoose

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2021, 02:15:22 AM »

Not sure about regeneration, maybe there will be enough missiles if the targeting AI is tweaked. There are also not that many missile ships (just the gryphon, buffalo mk2 and falcon(p)?). I would really like to see more ships with missile autoforge, some other system that augments missiles, or a dedicated missile capital. Missile balance seems to revolve around quantity though - they are very niche and weak in small amounts, but when you have a ton of missile ships nothing will survive short of a paragon, so ships like that could be very broken. Then again, we have carriers...

Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders. (edit: they aren't infinite, but regenerate, I was wrong) Should probably move the ammo count to the flux cost field, and clarify that salamanders are infinite in the same field, for consistency.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2021, 07:12:36 AM by GenericGoose »
Logged

Kriby

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2021, 04:28:51 PM »

Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders.

They're not?! Whelp.
Logged

Mach56

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2021, 05:29:10 PM »

Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders.

They're not?! Whelp.

They are infinite, technically. They just use ammo faster than they regenerate it, so you when you hit 0 ammo your rate of fire is capped by the regeneration instead of the fire rate.
Logged

Retry

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2021, 06:18:51 PM »

Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders.

They're not?! Whelp.
Uh, yes they are.  Pilums can pump out infinite missiles, given a theoretical ship with infinite CR.  What it can't do is fire at its maximum rate for an infinite amount of time: Pilums fire faster than the missiles can regenerate, and at some point in time you run out of ammunition in your ready-rack, you're "throttled" and can only pump out Pilums as fast as you can regenerate them (which is about half its maximum fire rate).

This is one of the reasons (arguably the biggest one) I prefer missiles to regenerate.
I can see some missiles being reworked with regeneration mechanics, but not all (or even most).  I certainly wouldn't want to see the current Sabot or Reaper racks becoming reloadable, those types of missiles are simply too powerful to add regen mechanics for existing racks, and would need serious consideration and new weapon variants to see non-game breaking ones at all.

Other vanilla missiles that are a bit less high-value, though?  Sure.  Especially ones whose role is undermined by finite reserves.

Ex: Swarmer SRM.  It's not a terrible missile weapon, but it's a poor anti-fighter weapon.  Swarmer ammo doesn't regenerate, while dead fighters replace.  Most fighter types also replace faster than Swarmer Batteries can kill them, even when assuming unrealistically-high hit rates for the Swarmer SRM.  This makes them quite underwhelming in their intended anti-fighter role.  (This appears to remain true when running 0.95's buffed Swarmer SRMs; they're cheaper with a bit more killing power but the critical ammunition concern remains).  I'm currently experimenting with a reworked Swarmer with regenerating mechanics to see how/if that changes things.

IMO, missiles intended for a primary anti-fighter role or PD role could be considered candidates for regenerating mechanics, as their intended targets either may (missiles) or will (fighters) replace themselves indefinitely.  Not to say that every anti-fighter/anti-missile missile should regenerate indefinitely (SWP's ultra-cheap Flare Launcher PD is a good example of a non-regenerating PD solution), but certainly things like the Swarmer SRM and Proximity Charge launcher (why is this the most expensive medium missile?  Do people really use it?) could be considered for re-imagining as ammo-regenerating anti-fighter/PD options.
Logged

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2021, 12:10:37 AM »

Outside of phase baiting, AI is pretty good with its missile use. But yes, any improvements there should be on the side of the AI. And possibly a slight agility boost for 2nd stage Hurricanes.
Regenerating missiles would basically turn them into fighter equivalents, which is more like weapons we already have. I prefer the variety.
I can understand the change of making ballistic weapons ammo-less, but missiles should definitely keep their ammo.
Logged

GenericGoose

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2021, 05:35:12 AM »

Another minor inconsistency: every missile has its ammo count displayed in the 'no flux cost to fire' field, while pilums do not, and have an entirely separate 'max ammo' field down below - actually fooled me into thinking they are infinite for a while, same as salamanders.

They're not?! Whelp.
Oops... noob mistake. They are similar to autopulse lasers and do regenerate at a rate of 1 every 10 seconds and have a max capacity of 30. It's a little confusing, because salamanders, pilums and other missiles all describe their ammo mechanics differently. It is my fault for not reading it carefully, though.
Outside of phase baiting, AI is pretty good with its missile use. But yes, any improvements there should be on the side of the AI. And possibly a slight agility boost for 2nd stage Hurricanes..
.
You can bait AI into wasting ammo on something like an unkillable monitor, I've done that with onslaughts and their triple annihilator pods. On the topic of regenerating missiles, I think most would be fine without that, if the AI is tweaked to use the sparse and powerful missiles more carefully - avoid overkill, targets they can't hit and firing into too much PD.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2021, 07:07:36 AM »

Regenerating missiles would basically turn them into fighter equivalents, which is more like weapons we already have.

Having actually tried it - it really wouldn't. But this topic has been trod a lot and there's really nothing new to say on it. Alex likes non-regenerating missiles and that's what we're stuck with.
Logged

Retry

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2021, 02:57:04 PM »

Regenerating missiles would basically turn them into fighter equivalents, which is more like weapons we already have. I prefer the variety.
From testing some (well, two) vanilla missiles-turned-regenerating (plus experience with modded missiles), I fundamentally disagree that regenerating mechanics reduce weapon variety.  In fact, I'd claim the few good missiles in the modiverse with regeneration mechanics do much more for practical variety than the 1000+ Harpoon and Atropos analogues.
Logged

sector_terror

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2021, 03:17:00 PM »

I can defend the AIs use of missile sans phase-baiting. I to this day struggle with using missiles, often entirely wasting them or just never using them(I've started using them, like swapping my onslaughts pillum launchers to various others). The AI on the other hand is excellent at them and rarely ever wastes a shot sans the times they try to ram a reaper into the face of my onslaughts and dominators. Even then I can't blame them for the choice since even getting a torpedo on these ships is a nightmare half the time the way I build them. So yeah, sans phase-baiting I just don't see it. Never see an AI fire reapers into a wolf that's for sure.
Logged

Maethendias

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
  • Esteemed Warlord
    • View Profile
Re: about missiles
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2021, 04:42:56 PM »

Not sure about regeneration, maybe there will be enough missiles if the targeting AI is tweaked. There are also not that many missile ships (just the gryphon, buffalo mk2 and falcon(p)?). I would really like to see more ships with missile autoforge, some other system that augments missiles, or a dedicated missile capital. Missile balance seems to revolve around quantity though - they are very niche and weak in small amounts, but when you have a ton of missile ships nothing will survive short of a paragon, so ships like that could be very broken. Then again, we have carriers...

there already IS a missile capital

now unpilotable by the player however
Logged