Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sultan Khalid]

So, if the Gryphon (unofficered) is armed with any point defense, it seems the AI will use the range of the point defense for engagement rather than it's missiles, leading to some weird melee action Gryphon. Haven't tested it with cautious or timid officers.

[Alex]

Thank you for the report! Actually changed this just this week, so that cautious/timid officers *don't* do this.

[Sultan Khalid]

Shouldn't this interaction be reserved only to the agressive and reckless ai? Given how this fundamentaly changes how the "intented" (steady) gryphon should act...

[Alex]

There was a similar discussion here, just a little while ago:
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=26164.0

I think you could make a reasonable case for it, but it involves more than just the Gryphon, and I think reserving this type of behavior for cautious officers is probably safer overall.

[Wyvern]

Shouldn't this interaction be reserved only to the agressive and reckless ai? Given how this fundamentaly changes how the "intented" (steady) gryphon should act...

Definitely not - aggressive and reckless explicitly call out that they will use PD weapons as primary attack weaponry, while cautious and timid are generally assumed to keep their distance.

Steady is kindof the odd one out, where you could argue either way for what the default should be, but Alex has made some pretty good points that in general the current way things are set up is better. For example, consider a frigate armed with machine guns, vulcans, and swarmers: it should absolutely be trying to close to PD-weapon range, and shouldn't try to hang out at missile range.

[Sultan Khalid]

My line of thought is that you can't be mad at one ship for using it's point defense at it's intended role only, while you can be mad at a ship for using point defense for "melee combat". Especially if you see a missile carrier bruising it out in the middle of the frigates (of course assuming steady AI). There are plenty of substitutes for PD weapons in offensive role. Consider the Lasher,  Light Autocannons can suffice the need for offensive PD, but this cannot be done the other way around. At a range of 700, you could say is pretty "steadylike". Not 300 from Light Dual Machinegun, not 1000 for the missiles (or medium ballistics), just right in the middle.

Now, let's say you want to change it's behavior to use it's point deffense agressively, doesn't it makes more sense to add an agressive officer? And isn't it more steadylike to have a steady officer be predictable to use it's weapons for their intended role? Let's say, if you wanted an unofficered frigates to engage in a particular set of rules, you can just adjust it's weapons. Put PD on it to act as an PD frigate, or put designated offensive weapons to act offensively. You gain the desirable outcome by just adjusting the loadout. Now if you wanted it to be both PD and offensive, then you put an officer at it.

"For example, consider a frigate armed with machine guns, vulcans, and swarmers: it should absolutely be trying to close to PD-weapon range, and shouldn't try to hang out at missile range." I think it's rather the oposite. If you armed a steady AI with PD, it is expected of it to act as PD. If you didn't, why not just put light autocannons in it? Unless of course you wanted it to use it's PD agressively, huh? huh? See what I did here? Anyway, this game is an expression of Alex creativity and thus I will not get into the way of his intended design. Just somthing I think is worth a to keep a note on.

Sorry if this conversation was had before.

[Alex]

I think it's worth keeping in mind that, due to how missiles are in the game, ships that use them exclusively as their main armament are quite rare. It's pretty much just the Gryphon; a few other ships could perhaps be fitted that way but it'd be of questionable effectiveness. And, a few missiles that are more useful that way (i.e. the Annihilator Pod), IIRC, are treated by the AI as "guns" for the purposes of deciding the engagement range.

On the other hand, ships using PD-flagged weapons as their main guns is comparatively much more common. I think it makes sense for "steady" officers/default ship behavior to err on the side of the more common scenario.

(With the caveat that I don't think this matters *too* much one way or the other!)

[TaLaR]

Machine gun is a melee weapon, you never put it on a ship just for PD. Vulcan is so much better at that, one can replace 2-3 mgs. Maybe mg should just have some AI hints?

Whether Vulcan should be treated as melee may be decided by how much of total front-facing dps (or weapon OP) budget it has on the ship? Like a Lasher with 5 Vulcans is melee, but a Gryphon with any amount is generally not.

[Sultan Khalid]

Machine gun is a melee weapon, you never put it on a ship just for PD. Vulcan is so much better at that, one can replace 2-3 mgs. Maybe mg should just have some AI hints?

Yeah, Machine Guns should be removed from the PD category in my opinion. So underwhelming in the the PD role, but great as a flux efficient close range kinetic.

Whether Vulcan should be treated as melee may be decided by how much of total front-facing dps (or weapon OP) budget it has on the ship? Like a Lasher with 5 Vulcans is melee, but a Gryphon with any amount is generally not.

The problem i find with that is how to translate OP usage to intention. How to tell apart a 5 Vulcans offensive Lasher and a 5 Vulcan PD Lasher? I think PD weapons should be used exclusively for PD, unless officered otherwise. Also, the machine guns could be brought to regular offensive weaponry category. Otherwise, weapon classes are pretty much irrelevant. No need to call something PD at all. "The problem I find with that is how to translate OP usage to intention" - I think a good way to do that is to stick the average AI to the intended use only.

In my opinion the best solution is to implement a system where the player decides what intended role which weapon should perform. It can say "PD" as standard role, but the player could just hop into the weapon assignments and change it to offensive. Everyone can have what they want. But it would require more work. Maybe above the weapon groups "autofire" option, let's say, another box who let's you change the group to PD or offensive. What do you think of that?

[Elshama]

In my opinion the best solution is to implement a system where the player decides what intended role which weapon should perform. It can say "PD" as standard role, but the player could just hop into the weapon assignments and change it to offensive. Everyone can have what they want. But it would require more work. Maybe above the weapon groups "autofire" option, let's say, another box who let's you change the group to PD or offensive. What do you think of that?

Something like this would be nice. Maybe something even as simple as tagging the ship as pd or not would work albeit a bit less effectively.

[smithney]

Could it perhaps be a hullmod? I feel like that might be the most simple and the most transparent way for the player to tell the game "use this ship's PD as a shanker". Thought a systemic solution would surely be better in a long run.

[Serenitis]

Maybe mg should just have some AI hints?

Adding PD_ALSO would make them prioritise ships if in range, but still be able to shoot missiles otherwise.
Not entirely sure if that's a great idea or not, but it's something you can do.

[Princess_of_Evil]

Honestly the game should either stop lying that MGs are PD, or make a new primary role of Heavy PD for weapons that are meant to swat frigates.