[AV8R]

Playing FSPort using the 3.6.12 SSE executable for a while I was quite pleased with the improved performance of the Interceptor missile' s lead trajectory as opposed to the follow trajectory of the original FS1 Interceptor missile. The follow path made it almost useless against small targets or anything that wasn't huge and directly in front of you (which is why I abandoned them all together when the Hornets were introduced in FS1 - at least for a follow missile it's tighter turn radius gave you a 1 in 4 chance of a hit instead of no chance with the Interceptors). Due to the change, the improved flight characteristics of the new Interceptors once again made it my go-to secondary because it was pretty sure to score a hit.

Which brings me to this concern: as I played through the FSPort again, this time using 3.6.14 RC6, I noticed the Interceptor's lead trajectory seems to have changed. It's weird, it's not quite lead, but not quite follow either. To make matters worse, I noticed when chasing some Basilisks around in one mission I'd get a lock, fire an Interceptor and the Basi would drop a CM and of course the Interceptor would take off straight like a Fury into the void. Fair enough, but that's not the problem. The problem is even though I still had lock and the Basi didn't drop any more CMs, if I fired any more Interceptors, they would all head straight out like Fury's, with no discernable change in course. If I broke away and reacquired lock and fired again, they behave normally, albeit with the strange not-quite-lead, not-quite-follow trajectory.

I replayed the mission in case it was a fluke, but the second time around it happened again: every time someone I got a lock on dropped a CM, all Interceptors fired at the target while still locked-on went straight out like a Fury until I reacquired lock.

So I went to the Tech Room and ran one of the stand alone missions (Loner) where you can beat up Shivans and a Vasudan Ace for kicks and tried the same thing there. The Shivans were an easy take down with lasers and, after waiting for the Vasudans to frag my wingmen so the Ace would show up, I tried the Interceptors on them. The wingman gave up with a straight shot to the face with 2 Interceptors (big surprise), but knowing the Ace was a bit more cautious, I got behind him and fired my first Interceptor at him and, sure enough he dropped a CM and missile blindly went straight. So, while maintaining lock and while listening carefully for the sound of a CM drop and not hearing it I fired more Inteceptors and they didn't change course at all - 6 missiles gone. I broke off, reacquired lock and fired again and this time the missile followed (he dodged and I missed). Subsequent shots hit their mark as I closed the gap and he failed to drop any more CMs. The "problem" is completely repeatable.

What's going on here? Maybe CMs are dropping but I'm not hearing the sound or something is up with the missile-lock code which invalidates all missiles fired at a target once one missile is defeated by a CM? I don't know. Is anyone else seeing something like this?

[AV8R]

Gonna go back to 3.6.12 to see if it makes a difference. Will report my findings here after I do.

[AV8R]

Ok, after playing a few rounds of "Loner" with Scorpoins and the Vasudan Ace with both 3.6.12 SSE2 and 3.6.14 RC6 SSE2 I found.... nothing conclusive. Strange. I could swear that a couple of days ago that all in the Interceptors I fired at an enemy that successfully dodged a missile with a CM would render all of my Interceptors useless. Now the best I could manage with either version was 1 Interceptor not homing after the enemy successfully dodging with a CM (and I purposely waited a couple of seconds between shots while maintaining lock). After that, the missiles would home (although the homing trajectory still doesn't seem as aggressive as it was before).

IDK, maybe something to do with how my new PC ever-so-slightly changes the "feel" of the game? Perhaps - but this is the new reality for me so I just gotta get used to it. I'm certainly not going back to a Pentium III!

Once thing my experiment did bring to light (pun warning) - some of the single missions have no suns when running 3.6.14. They're there when running 3.6.12, but you're left in the dark with 3.6.14. Kinda funny in Loner when you run into something large and realize you just hit an asteroid since they're pitch black without a sun to illuminate them.

[niffiwan]

Once thing my experiment did bring to light (pun warning) - some of the single missions have no suns when running 3.6.14. They're there when running 3.6.12, but you're left in the dark with 3.6.14. Kinda funny in Loner when you run into something large and realize you just hit an asteroid since they're pitch black without a sun to illuminate them.

Yep - that's a known bug in RC6, it's been fixed for RC7.
http://scp.indiegames.us/mantis/view.php?id=2646

[AV8R]

Good to know. Awaiting RC7 to do my part in the bug hunt.... 

[Goober5000]

You can try these builds...
http://staff.hard-light.net/goober5000/temp/r8994.zip

Some regression bugs from retail were fixed on June 10th, which is subsequent to RC6, but it shouldn't have affected homing behavior.

[AV8R]

The only reason I questioned this was after reading some old posts on how the Interceptor's performance in the original FreeSpace was so lame it moved some FSPort programmers to improve its tracking ability a while back. But that caused a stir with the purists who thought that the improved Interceptor changed the game dynamics and thus the balance and feel of the original FreeSpace.

I started to think that in 3.6.14 the improvements may have been dumbed down a bit to placate the purists. Glad you all stuck to your guns - that original Interceptor was nothing more than a Fury with a bigger warhead. 

[Goober5000]

The FSPort team didn't intentionally change that.  The missile homing algorithm was improved between retail FS1 and retail FS2.

[Legate Damar]

I never really had trouble hitting targets with FS1 interceptors.

[Mongoose]

Do you mean targets that were freighters and bigger, or targets like fighters, which the retail Interceptor was pretty much incapable of tracking?

(Besides improving the Interceptor, the improved FS2 missile code also makes "The Hammer and the Anvil" extremely difficult in the Port, since the enemy heat-seekers rip through the cargo you're supposed to be protecting.)

[AV8R]

Do you mean targets that were freighters and bigger, or targets like fighters, which the retail Interceptor was pretty much incapable of tracking?

(Besides improving the Interceptor, the improved FS2 missile code also makes "The Hammer and the Anvil" extremely difficult in the Port, since the enemy heat-seekers rip through the cargo you're supposed to be protecting.)

So this lead-trajectory improvement was given to heat-seekers (MX-50) as well as aspect-seekers? I really see no difference between retail heat-seeker trajectory and FSPort heat-seekers. When I use them, both stiil seem to do a lazy follow trajectory instead of a lead trajectory. Or did you mean the Shivans in "The Hammer and the Anvil" were using aspect-seekers?

Which brings up this point: why would a heat-seeking missile so accurately go after a cold cargo box? Seems counter-intuitive. The MX-50 is not a heat-seeker but a "target-seeker" (missile homes in on whatever I happen to have targeted in my HUD when fired). Then the whole Hammer and Anvil scenario makes more sense. Ever fire an MX-50 without targeting anything? They move in a straight line and will not home in on anything - even with enemy ships with their exhausts blazing right in front of them. Also, if the MX-50 really was a heat-seeking, fire-and-forget missile they'd be downright dangerous in a furball. Sure, you could fire off a bunch in a melee and they would immediately home in on any heat source - including the exhausts of your wingmen's ships!

Heat-seeker my (Rock)eye. The MX-50 and the Rockeye are target-seekers - heat has nothing to do with it.