[SaltyWaffles]

Hi--I'm not dead, sorry, just MIA for a while--one of the things that has nagged me a bit about FS gameplay in general, but especially in my replays of AoA and WiH, is that torpedoes are not nearly as fun to use as they could be, and they seem (to me) flawed in how they're deployed.

Basically, it just seems very un-fun and counterintuitive for torpedoes to be aspect-lock instead of dumbfire. From a gameplay perspective, it's both frustrating and boring to wait 10 seconds for my Helios torpedoes to gain aspect lock...despite the fact that I'm aiming directly at the target from 10 meters away. It'd be MUCH more fun to hit the afterburners to gain as much speed as possible, line up my craft, pull a little lead on the target if need be (if this is too difficult for some players, all they have to do is get a little closer before firing), and fire off an entire salvo of torpedoes. It might feel like the dive-bombing dynamic in WW2--a full-speed dive towards the target, lining up with the craft itself for aiming, releasing at the last second, and then pulling hard to level out and escape the blast.

It also means that you can fire off multiple banks of torpedoes in rapid succession, giving heavier bombers a reason for existence (when they DO reach the target, they can deploy three times the payload in the same amount of time). It also adds some skill and learning curve to bombing, while still making it very doable for newer players.

I may be totally wrong, but only minor adjustment for the torpedo tables themselves would need adjustment--aside from the dumbfire change, an increase or decrease in torpedo speed may be warranted.

So...is this something that might sound good in theory but just doesn't work in practice? Or does it have some practical merit?

[MatthTheGeek]

That's already been done in the past in several mods. Most campaigns just tend to keep the FS gotta-lock way for balance reasons.

[SaltyWaffles]

That's already been done in the past in several mods. Most campaigns just tend to keep the FS gotta-lock way for balance reasons.

I figured, but I'm curious as to why it's unbalanced (or even, isn't more balanced as dumbfire).

[headdie]

I wouldn't say unbalanced but it changes the balance quite dramatically.

Take Bear Baiting for example.  With dumbfire helos it is fairly easy as you just run up launch, run away and start again, the sitting there waiting adds to the difficulty and acts as a tension device for the story.  You would have to greatly reduce the time the Sath is in the mission before jumping which while not an issue for seasoned players would make the mission much more difficult for newbies.

[Scotty]

I'd say that this would just make AI bombers even more of a pain in escort missions, which is the exact opposite of what anyone wants.  With this, they wouldn't even have to respect the lock-on time, and as soon as they jump in, just start shoveling torpedoes at the nearest capital ship lead indicator.

[The E]

Actually, given that shockwaves can damage bombs (at least with the right flags enabled), this would make bomber intercept a bit easier, since it would be easier to get those bombs to commit fratricide.

[MatthTheGeek]

Dumbfire torpedoes and bomb-damaging shockwaves... That's starting to make a lot of ifs.

[Dragon]

Since BP is an FS universe mod, it'll most likely be better off keeping with such FS conventions. I've used such model in my own mods (mostly experiments, but they work).
Also, there's another reason to make torpedoes non-dumbfireable. If you're burst-firing DF missiles, you can easily waste a torpedo or two by holding the trigged down a bit too long. For UEF Saracen bombers, that'd make 1/3 of their torpedo load. Also, there are balance reasons, but "lockarm" also works quite well for forcing the player to lock onto the target instead of just dumbfiring the torps.

However, this is a very good idea for a more "realistic" mod (and a one not constrained by FS universe), given a lot of other changes. My idea for that was:
1). Get rid of AA dumbfires (goes well with a high-speed, DE style flight model).
2). Make torpedoes less damaging when not locked on.
3). Make shockwaves damage torpedoes.
4). Ramp up CIWS effectiveness (much more than in BP).
5). Strengthen the torpedoes a lot (comparable to WCS ones).
6). Make bombers load less torpedoes overall.
7). Get rid of dumbfire velocity penalty.
8). Edit the AI to handle all this.

Those changes effectively give you two options of attack. First is a locked run, in which you need to carefully pick an approach angle, suppress CIWS systems and wait for a lock. The second one is "dive bombing", in which you must accelerate your ship, get close and "trow" your torpedo past the CIWS fire. You need to mind your velocity vector in order to turn back in time, and to hit your target, but also not to launch your payload too early, or directly at a CIWS turret.

[MatthTheGeek]

Also, there's another reason to make torpedoes non-dumbfireable. If you're burst-firing DF missiles, you can easily waste a torpedo or two by holding the trigged down a bit too long.

Easily circumvented by keeping the aspect lock necessary, but drastically reducing the lock time.

[Scotty]

Bank cooldown still exists whether you have a lock or not.  If you manage to fire two sets of torpedoes by "holding down the trigger a bit too long" I suggest you get your reflexes tested, as the shortest cooldown actual torpedo that I know of is fully twenty seconds (Cyclops).

[Commander Zane]

If you're flying a craft with two bombs in two separate banks and empty the first bank, it cycles to the next bank with a one-second cooldown.

[crizza]

Strange and I thought I was smart launching two torpedos, switching the bank, lock on, fire another pair and switch back to the first bank^^

[Scotty]

It's still a cooldown, and I still don't know why you'd be holding the secondary trigger so long if you're firing torpedoes.

[Commander Zane]

For MASSIVE DAMAGE.

[MatthTheGeek]

Strange and I thought I was smart launching two torpedos, switching the bank, lock on, fire another pair and switch back to the first bank^^

Improved AI now does that, too. Congratulations ! You are now as smart as the FS AI. (j/k)

[Aesaar]

Faster firing torpedoes would be a decent way of making GTVA heavy bombers somewhat viable.  They've all got those huge missile racks on the front.  Something like Cyclops$Boanerges, which could swarm 2, so 4 torps per dual salvo, could work.

[Scotty]

Swarm torpedoes make Delenda Est unplayable on nearly any difficulty.  The numbers of bombs in the air at any given time isn't really a small number any way.

[Aesaar]

The part in Delenda Est with the Boanerges is probably the easiest part of the mission.  Those things are so slow and so big it's basically a turkey shoot.  They don't even have as much firepower as an Artemis.  The ability to fire more torps could actually make them worth the hangar space.  Right now, there's absolutely no reason why GTVA ships should carry them instead of more Rheas and Artemises.

Note I'm not advocating putting them on anything but the Boanerges and the Ursa.

[Scotty]

The Boanerges SuperBomber bug made Delenda Est unplayable, so I'm speaking from a position of "We know this doesn't work", rather than "This probably won't work".

To quote our friend General Battuta: OH SWEET JESUS THE SKY IS FULL OF WARHEADS

[headdie]

The Boanerges SuperBomber bug made Delenda Est unplayable, so I'm speaking from a position of "We know this doesn't work", rather than "This probably won't work".

To quote our friend General Battuta: OH SWEET JESUS THE SKY IS FULL OF WARHEADS

I think i remember that one hitting the fan lol