Eternal Silence. Discuss.

2»

Comments

  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1568513:date=Sep 30 2006, 03:58 AM:name=Aldaris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Aldaris @ Sep 30 2006, 03:58 AM) [snapback]1568513[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
    How are you supposed to dodge missles, if you could only afterburn forwards?
    <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    The same way as with any other game:
    Harsh turns, forward afterburners, countermeasures, and luck.
    Aspect lock should be hard to evade, no? Right now, missile evasion is standard, and the only way you die by missile is if it was shot from near-pointblank, or there's been a huge screen of billions of missiles making full dodge impossible.
  • AldarisAldaris Join Date: 2002-03-25 Member: 351Members, Constellation
    <!--quoteo(post=1568556:date=Sep 30 2006, 12:19 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cereal_KillR @ Sep 30 2006, 12:19 PM) [snapback]1568556[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
    The same way as with any other game:
    Harsh turns, forward afterburners, countermeasures, and luck.
    Aspect lock should be hard to evade, no? Right now, missile evasion is standard, and the only way you die by missile is if it was shot from near-pointblank, or there's been a huge screen of billions of missiles making full dodge impossible.
    <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Why should it be the same as every other game? Being easy to avade is countered by the speed they can be fired, and the number of missles available. If harsh turns were the only counter available, most of the time would be spent running away.
  • Iced_EagleIced_Eagle Borg Engineer Join Date: 2003-03-02 Member: 14218Members
    We've been thinking of ways to get some sort of auto-landing sequence in. It's all still on paper and in discussion, so for now, feel free to park your fighters on the roof at wierd angles <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />

    Keep telling us what we need to fix guys! We have a good idea of what needs to be done, but be sure to keep giving us your 2 cents so we know we're on the right track.

    Patch should be released hopefully within a week. Depends on all of our time schedules to make sure we can test it a bit before release.
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1568565:date=Sep 30 2006, 05:52 PM:name=Aldaris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Aldaris @ Sep 30 2006, 05:52 PM) [snapback]1568565[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
    Why should it be the same as every other game? Being easy to avade is countered by the speed they can be fired, and the number of missles available. If harsh turns were the only counter available, most of the time would be spent running away.
    <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    You asked "How are you supposed to dodge missles, if you could only afterburn forwards?" and I answered. It doesn't have to be all four combined, but all it means is that they shouldn't be just a trivial "press shift and a direction" nuisance. After all, they're not dumbfires, and the point of the missiles is that they're not cannons. Cannons are useful because they fire fast, you have a lot of ammo, and can be used both by pointblank fire or by screening the enemy's flight zone. Missiles shouldn't be the same.
  • a_civiliana_civilian Likes seeing numbers Join Date: 2003-01-08 Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
    You don't need harsh turns, or even to turn at all. Just use vertical or lateral thrusters (preferably vertical because your forward aspect is smaller vertically).
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Members
    Exactly, at it currently is, it's just a "shift+direction" routine. But I believe that harsh turns are necessary to evade missiles. In its current implementation, I don't even bother trying to get a lock and use my guns, because I know that the enemy ship is just going to evade the missile without even being bothered slightly by it.
  • AldarisAldaris Join Date: 2002-03-25 Member: 351Members, Constellation
    <!--quoteo(post=1568568:date=Sep 30 2006, 05:44 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cereal_KillR @ Sep 30 2006, 05:44 PM) [snapback]1568568[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
    You asked "How are you supposed to dodge missles, if you could only afterburn forwards?" and I answered. It doesn't have to be all four combined, but all it means is that they shouldn't be just a trivial "press shift and a direction" nuisance. After all, they're not dumbfires, and the point of the missiles is that they're not cannons. Cannons are useful because they fire fast, you have a lot of ammo, and can be used both by pointblank fire or by screening the enemy's flight zone. Missiles shouldn't be the same.
    <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I asked for an answer with the game as it's currantly implemented. I don't care how it's done in other games. If you couldn't thrust out of the way, missles would become way too dominant, seeing as you'd be running and turning all the time. Missle ammo and re-fire rate would have to be reduced to compensate. And nothing is more of a harsh direction change then directional thrusting. I don't see how you could remove that problem, without also gimping dogfighting.
  • a_civiliana_civilian Likes seeing numbers Join Date: 2003-01-08 Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
    Err... I'm rather confused as to what you're trying to argue now. You claimed that the removal of non-forward afterburners would force the use of rapid "harsh" changes in movement direction to dodge missiles... but is not the use of non-forward afterburners even more of a "harsh" change in direction?

    Further, I don't see the problem with requiring non-forward directional thrust to dodge missiles. After all, you need to be using all directional thrusters anyway to effectively dogfight.
  • AldarisAldaris Join Date: 2002-03-25 Member: 351Members, Constellation
    Who is "you' in that statement a_civilian? I'm saying that non-forward thrust for dodging missles is fine, and asked Cereal to come up with some ways of avoiding missles that does not involve this, hench the harsh turns. I don't agree this is the way to fix them, because it would mean you couldn't fight back, and the fact that non-forward thrust is already a harsh turn.

    I think the real problem, and balance between the two, is infinite afterburners. Remove that, and dodging becomes alot harder, but not impossible.
  • a_civiliana_civilian Likes seeing numbers Join Date: 2003-01-08 Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
    It was you, but I was confused as to what you were arguing. Thanks for trying to clarify.

    <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't agree this is the way to fix them, because it would mean you couldn't fight back, <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    By "this" do you mean requiring harsh turns to dodge missiles? If so, I do not agree. I've always used vertical thrusters to dodge missiles (since I didn't even realize afterburners existed for most of my initial games) and I find it quite easy to return fire while doing so.
  • AldarisAldaris Join Date: 2002-03-25 Member: 351Members, Constellation
    <!--quoteo(post=1568603:date=Oct 1 2006, 12:24 AM:name=a_civilian)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(a_civilian @ Oct 1 2006, 12:24 AM) [snapback]1568603[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
    It was you, but I was confused as to what you were arguing. Thanks for trying to clarify.
    By "this" do you mean requiring harsh turns to dodge missiles? If so, I do not agree. I've always used vertical thrusters to dodge missiles (since I didn't even realize afterburners existed for most of my initial games) and I find it quite easy to return fire while doing so.
    <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    By harsh turns, Cereal and I are meaning actual 90 degree turns, not thrusters. If this were the case, you would be constantly turning away from your target, due to how rapid you would have missles fired at you, in their currant state. However, thrusters do produce the same affect, and I don't see how Cereal means to have thrusters useless for evading, but have actual turns be affective.
Sign In or Register to comment.