Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 54

Author Topic: Starsector 0.65.2a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 326276 times)

Luna

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Want some water?
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #285 on: December 26, 2014, 10:14:01 PM »

Maybe instead of unlimited ammo, we could have another objective called "Supply Depots" or whatever that could return 10% of ballistic ammo every 30(?) seconds.

Just a thought. Infinite ammo on ballistics seems unrealistic.
Logged
Consider fully automatic Russian roulette

Venatos

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #286 on: December 27, 2014, 03:16:31 AM »

i find it reasonable to asume that they bring enough ammo for a battle, at the moment limited ammo is actually an artificial limitation, most of the time you allready know you will need more ammo. but you simply are beeing prevented from loading more.(the singular reason why some ballistics collect dust on the shelfs)
Logged

ValkyriaL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2145
  • The Guru of Capital Ships.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #287 on: December 27, 2014, 05:18:43 AM »

a munitions depot on the battlefield to refil ammo at a slow rate would be cool, because unlimited ammo is in every sense unrealistic and impossible, any ship carrying a full load of munitions could only fight for an hour or so at most. a ship can only carry so many shells and missiles in its cargo bay and weapons storages, else it could compromise ship integrity and safety. (storing HE shells missiles and torpedoes in the main corridor ::))

ATM i dont find ammo an issiue, you NEVER run out of ammo before the battle is over, if you do, your either fighting something way above your weight class, or your doing something wrong.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12156
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #288 on: December 27, 2014, 03:40:23 PM »

Chain flagships is the most cost efficient way (for Combat/Technology characters) to battle entire fleets, which are far heavier than a few of the player's ships, and smaller ships limited by ammo will run out.  Of course, ammo-bound ships can retreat and re-engage.

Aside from that, a few weapons are ammo hogs and/or low capacity.  Vulcans can run out of ammo during a serious battle.  I do not use thumpers and HMGs because capacity is so low, even with Expanded Magazines.
Logged

TheKillerWolf

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #289 on: December 27, 2014, 09:22:06 PM »

Ammo is only unlimited on cap ships.  Shooting your guns lowers timers you WILL run out of ammo on everything else do to your timer taking you into CR% that cause your guns to perma fail. And hes working on magazine based guns it seems. (Please change it from clips!! It bothers my inner gun nut!!)
Logged

JT

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #290 on: December 27, 2014, 10:13:51 PM »

We might be able to use "bin" or "box", if we want to capture the feel in four characters or less, but yeah, "magazine" is the true moniker.  Of course, maybe they actually are clips -- replete with a "clink" and a flying chunk of metal away from the ship each time a new magazine is loaded!  That would certainly be unique. =)

As for the argument that limited ammo is an artificial limitation compared to reality, it really isn't.  I'm largely talking out of my butt here since I have no actual naval experience, but this is based more or less on the "big picture" that I've gleaned from various un- to semi-reliable sources on the 'net, for whatever it's worth:

Capital ships do have massive stores of ammunition, it is true -- but only a fraction is available for combat at any time; rounds are continuously loaded according to the specifications and then sent up the munitions elevator for use by the gun crews, with the gun crews maintaining several rounds on hand -- ideally building up a reserve of a couple dozen in case injuries, damcon, etc. prevent the munitions crews from continuing the pace.  This is closest in principle to, say, the pulse laser mechanics, where it rebuilds a round every couple of seconds but can eventually drop to a sputtering pace if rounds are fired too quickly.  For large-calibre autocannons, as opposed to main guns, they often have no more than forty or fifty rounds within the weapon's magazine, but will then need to reload from stores -- by reason of being rather unforgiving of hands and other extremities while active they generally require the weapon to be brought offline for reloading.

All weapons can be reloaded within a couple of hours from stores, but until those stores can be brought up from stowage they remain inaccessible during combat.  Trying to move massive munitions while the ship is performing hard manoeuvres in rough seas has potentially disastrous consequences (not "explosive", but "squishy" as far as the munitions specialists are concerned).
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #291 on: December 28, 2014, 04:33:00 AM »

I think it's actually much more plausible that a ship weapon should use a clip to reload, rather than a detachable magazine. A clip is just a bunch of ammo stored together, while a magazine has a feed mechanism that is part of the mechanic of the weapon. 
- A ship weapon would have all its mechanic contained in itself to be reliable.
- Clips are lighter an thus easier to transport.
- The protective function of a magazine case would be wasted on board an enclosed starship.
- I can easily imagine an autofactory spitting out ammo not in single bullets but with connections, like the parts of a plastic mold. That would make for a natural, easy to transport clip and explain the whole mechanic.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Captain Pugh

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #292 on: December 28, 2014, 06:31:01 AM »

If we have combat timers why would we have things like ammo? 2 mechanics that stand for the exact same thing.

The two mechanics reward/punish opposed ways of fighting (all else being equal etc):-

1 Limited ammo, no combat timer: Rewards accurate and disciplined fire; punishes spray and pray.

2 Combat timer, no limited ammo: Rewards spray and pray; punishes accurate and disciplined fire.

I find #1 to be more satisfying, so if I had to choose one or t'other I'd prefer that.  The ideal wouldn't be so binary, and would be an interesting balance between the two (eg the magazine mechanic idea) - which allows more room for diverse builds... rather than devolving into no-brainer guns and guns that are only ever vendor trash.
Logged

Captain Pugh

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #293 on: December 28, 2014, 08:44:52 AM »

@Gothars: By 'magazine', I don't think that folks are meaning detachable box magazines, but 'magazine' is the generic term for the place where ammo is stored; whether that be in the ship's main magazine or ready to use in the mounting itself.  It's 'clip' that has the specific meaning: a strip with some rounds lined up in it that is then inserted into the magazine - from there you push the rounds into the magazine and remove the clip (usually; sometimes the clip gets ejected in some other way).

You see this mostly with WWI/WWII rifles, before detachable box magazines were commonly used.

@JT and generally: How ammo is dealt with in ships is mostly down to how powerful that ammo is, what would happen if that part of the ship were hit with that ammo in it, and how much mass and expense it takes to armour the path that the ammo travels.  Smaller rounds can be stored in the 'turret' (cupola) itself; main gun rounds tend to be kept (with powder charges and projectiles kept on different decks, both comprising the magazine) deep in the armoured citadel and hoisted up to the turret as needed, with heavy doors to prevent a hit that penetrates the cupola sending a flash all the way back into the magazine.

[There's some evidence that part of the problem with some British capital ships exploding way too easily in WWI was that there was an obsession with having a higher rate of fire; so orders were sent out to cut safety corners to this end.  Main gun ammo may have been stored in cupolas and some elevator blast doors may have been disabled in order to get that RoF up... but then what should have been fairly 'minor' cupola hits detonated the ready ammo lying around and sent an unopposed flash right down to the magazine.  There may have also been a problem, at around that time anyway, with the cordite being stored for too long, but we'll probably never really know for sure... though it's sure fun reading naval historians debating this. :)]

I can imagine that most of the Starsector gun mountings will follow the design of some of the slicker mounts used today (eg OTO-Melara 127 mm/64 LW), as mentioned by JT, where there are ready to use magazines in the cupola, that thus offer a temporary high RoF (or/and instant selection of different types of rounds); but the below-deck main magazine is still the usual one (the most heavily armoured part of the ship) as described above.  Once you've fired off the cupola magazines, then feed/RoF is slow from the main magazine, and if there's a break in the fighting, the cupola magazines can be refilled... though this takes time.

The very powerful cap ship main guns (if chem powered) would follow the more classical battleship feed system, for the same reason.  But this then makes the magazine a point of catastrophic failure (that costs loads of mass to protect properly), so if these ships can manufacture ammo in a more mass-efficient way, rather than store loads of it in magazines, then that'll defo be the way forward.

It may well be more efficient to manufacture clips of ammo, which then get fed into the magazine; the number of rounds in each clip being governed by that not being catastrophic for the ship if any part of the system that feeds that clip to the magazine gets hit, which will be linear with the gun's power.  In other words, what HartLord wrote:- ;D

I think the way this works, is that instead of a central magazine, they have an autofac. The autofac produces clips of ammunition, which are then loaded into the individual guns' magazines.

Just a few thoughts in terms of how the mechanic could work, continuing the high verisimilitude/immersion of the game... I'm sure Alex has bigger fish to fry, but it'd save him a lot of future angst from purists :D if there's even just a tiny bit of flavour text that shows that the 'clips' being mentioned actually are literal clips.

Cheers.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2014, 08:48:48 AM by Captain Pugh »
Logged

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #294 on: December 28, 2014, 11:00:05 AM »

Quote
- I can easily imagine an autofactory spitting out ammo not in single bullets but with connections, like the parts of a plastic mold. That would make for a natural, easy to transport clip and explain the whole mechanic.
As for using an autofactory to manufacture ammunition as needed, I can only say that I cannot see this as being practical. The additional power required to run a factory is an unnecessary strain on the ship's reactors during a battle, and the space required to fit the factory (and possibly the extra reactors or the larger reactor required to run the factory on top of everything else required for battle) is in my opinion likely to cost you more space than you save by storing raw metal and the components for any explosives and propellant instead of complete shells. On top of that, manufacturing your ammunition is most likely slower than pulling it out of wherever you keep it when it's not in the ready magazines. I also doubt that it's significantly safer to store the components and manufacture the ammunition and propellant as needed than it is to just store the ammunition and propellant.

Quote
2 Combat timer, no limited ammo: Rewards spray and pray; punishes accurate and disciplined fire.
I don't know that I'd quite say that the timer rewards spray and pray, as you still have a time pressure on your engagement and so accuracy still matters though having unlimited ammunition does remove the need to conserve ammunition and attempt to employ it for best effect rather than simply keeping a steady stream of fire on the target.
Logged

angrytigerp

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #295 on: December 28, 2014, 02:43:49 PM »

I have to ask, what is the point of having balli and energy weapons now if there really isn't any difference between the two?

This, pretty much. The only differentiation will be hardpoint/turret compatibility, and if you were thinking along the lines of "flux bonus is gimmicky" or "ammo is an unnecessary resource", then think about the fact that you are now making it so that ships are primarily differentiated through the available slots. There's no real difference now between high- and low-tech ship paradigms now, as the only difference between the two will now be whether they go PEW PEW PEW or BZZZZZT.

Having ballistic weapons require ammo was a sacrifice at higher levels of gameplay, but it also had strategic value, especially as you got newer ships with universal slots -- slap in Ballistic weapons for better overall DPS, at the risk of having them run out if the battle ran too long, or go with Energy weapons for steady, if lower, DPS with no risk of running out of ammo. Now there's just going to be objectively 'best' weapons, in terms of DPS, and players will be rushing to either get the ship(s) that support that/those weapon(s), and everything else falls by the wayside. No more keeping low-tech 'brawlers' in your fleet composition because they have better short-term offensive ability, you might as well just stick with universal-slotted high-tech ships with better shields and reactors.

EDIT: I also realize I'm quoting from the first page of replies, didn't even think about the fact that there's been like 3 weeks of conversation on the topic; so if what I said has already been debunked/explained/accounted for, please ignore me.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #296 on: December 28, 2014, 07:22:09 PM »

I have to ask, what is the point of having balli and energy weapons now if there really isn't any difference between the two?

This, pretty much. The only differentiation will be hardpoint/turret compatibility, and if you were thinking along the lines of "flux bonus is gimmicky" or "ammo is an unnecessary resource", then think about the fact that you are now making it so that ships are primarily differentiated through the available slots. There's no real difference now between high- and low-tech ship paradigms now, as the only difference between the two will now be whether they go PEW PEW PEW or BZZZZZT.

Having ballistic weapons require ammo was a sacrifice at higher levels of gameplay, but it also had strategic value, especially as you got newer ships with universal slots -- slap in Ballistic weapons for better overall DPS, at the risk of having them run out if the battle ran too long, or go with Energy weapons for steady, if lower, DPS with no risk of running out of ammo. Now there's just going to be objectively 'best' weapons, in terms of DPS, and players will be rushing to either get the ship(s) that support that/those weapon(s), and everything else falls by the wayside. No more keeping low-tech 'brawlers' in your fleet composition because they have better short-term offensive ability, you might as well just stick with universal-slotted high-tech ships with better shields and reactors.

EDIT: I also realize I'm quoting from the first page of replies, didn't even think about the fact that there's been like 3 weeks of conversation on the topic; so if what I said has already been debunked/explained/accounted for, please ignore me.

I disagree with this. Hardpoint/turret compatibility is a HUGE difference; universal slots are exceptionally rare on vanilla ships. Ballistics and energy have large differences in flux/damage ratios, per hit shot damage, per weapon dps abilities, range, and damage types. A tempest, while a very fast and powerful ship, has energy weapons. It cannot be kitted out as a shield piercer, or throw heavy mauler rounds from 1000 range. This is a key element of the ship balance in the game.
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4682
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #297 on: December 28, 2014, 09:36:49 PM »

Also, the statement that there's no difference between high-tech and low-tech ships other than their now-more-similar weapons is easily shown to be false just by looking at their stat sheets.
Logged

Steven Shi

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 223
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #298 on: January 04, 2015, 10:37:09 PM »

Remember the weapon load out in games like Mechwarrior?

Ballistic = heavy damage, low heat but limited ammo
Energy = average damage, high heat but unlimited ammo

That system really emphasizes the pro/con of weapon selection.

The new proposed system for Starfarer makes weapon choices seem somewhat less important. Blasting away with kinetic currently doesn't feel much different from using pulse lasers regardless of ammo.

Maybe tweak the damage profile of weapon types (and hull/armor value to compensate) to make things more dynamic? Personally, I edit the armor in the excel file for all the ships so anything other than explosives does squat to a fully armored battleship.
Logged

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3021
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #299 on: January 05, 2015, 07:07:50 AM »

Maybe tweak the damage profile of weapon types (and hull/armor value to compensate) to make things more dynamic? Personally, I edit the armor in the excel file for all the ships so anything other than explosives does squat to a fully armored battleship.

I find 100% max armor blocking to be fun, too. 8 machine guns blast you and do 2 armor damage. :P
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 54