Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: joek on October 12, 2001, 09:52:00 am
-
I was thinking of making a next generation swarming missile (Hornet -> Tornado -> ???) and I thought I'd making heat seaking (so you don't have to wait for a lock, just fire and forget). But, copying the Tornado and changing it to heat seaking, the missiles do far less damage than the aspect Tornado. Does any one know a reason for this?
Joe.
------------------
www.joek.com (//"http://www.joek.com/")
Revelations: A FS2 Campaign (//"http://www.joek.com/other/freespace/")
-
Originally posted by joek:
I was thinking of making a next generation swarming missile (Hornet -> Tornado -> ???) and I thought I'd making heat seaking (so you don't have to wait for a lock, just fire and forget). But, copying the Tornado and changing it to heat seaking, the missiles do far less damage than the aspect Tornado. Does any one know a reason for this?
Joe.
Probably because it's easier to shake a heat seeker than an aspect-locking missile - so more of the swarm abaies are shook off by the target.
-
The ingame cheat shows you that there is some sort of heat seeking fire and forget hornet called the MX-52 or something, it fires several mx50s at a target. Its crappy cause it takes forever to reload tho, ( i think its for a capship)
-
I made a missile of this type called the firefly.
More of a replacement for the Tempest actually. about 1/2 the size of a hornet
doing 3/4 of the damage at 1/2 of the range
and not swarm but rapid firing.
Boy do they help in a scrape. Good on bombers too. I made them small as heat seakers are too easily shaken to invest too much space for each missile.
I found with swarms that 1 counter measure could distract a whole swarm. Rapid fire means less missiles are caught by a counter measure.
------------------
Phil.
Trust In Me &
Fall As-well
[This message has been edited by WraithHost (edited 10-12-2001).]
-
[pimp]
I prefer my Icarus missile. It's fast, heat seeking, maneuverable, has a high ammo capacity, and it's POWERFUL. Great for stopping SF Dragons right in their tracks. (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/biggrin.gif)
[/pimp]
-
and the downpoints of your missile are?
Perfect weapons are boreing. If a weapon is perfect there is no give and take in selecting your loadout.
my missile is only really effective if launched within 400m of it's victim and even then it takes 6 - 12 missiles to take out most larger fighters. however it needs no lock time and is maneuverable enough to hit anything heading away from you and most targets closing with you.
------------------
Phil.
Trust In Me &
Fall As-well
-
Try it with the Hornet- it should work fine.
The reason that the missiles do minimal damage as heat-seeking Tornadoes is because the tornado has a flag that makes it so the missiles won't do much damage if fired without a lock. Since you're heat seeking, you're firing without a lock, and the missiles never really "activate." I forget what the tag was, but if you remove it it should work fine.
-
Originally posted by WraithHost:
I made a missile of this type called the firefly.
More of a replacement for the Tempest actually. about 1/2 the size of a hornet
doing 3/4 of the damage at 1/2 of the range
and not swarm but rapid firing.
Boy do they help in a scrape. Good on bombers too. I made them small as heat seakers are too easily shaken to invest too much space for each missile.
I found with swarms that 1 counter measure could distract a whole swarm. Rapid fire means less missiles are caught by a counter measure.
Hey, that sounds cool! Mind if I borrow some of those ideas?
Originally posted by Anduril:
The reason that the missiles do minimal damage as heat-seeking Tornadoes is because the tornado has a flag that makes it so the missiles won't do much damage if fired without a lock. Since you're heat seeking, you're firing without a lock, and the missiles never really "activate." I forget what the tag was, but if you remove it it should work fine.
Ahh, I see it. It's called "lockarm". I'll try it without that. Thanks.
Joe.
------------------
www.joek.com ("http://www.joek.com/")
Revelations: A FS2 Campaign ("http://www.joek.com/other/freespace/")
-
Joek: Feel free to use the Ideas.
remember. Resist the lure of the dark side. No more 'magic bullets'.
I found a 100 degree view cone and a 0.4 second turn time made the missiles hard to avoid but not fool proof. I had a speed of 300 m/s and a life time of 2 seconds.
This gives a useful range of about 400m even though the true max range is 600m.
I made 2 varients,
A fragmentation warhead version that was good against armour and shields with a 10 m blast.
An Armour piercing warhead version that was poor against armour and shields but good against sub-systems with no blast, higher speed but less maneuverability.
Designed to take out those annoying turrets
on capships.
I used the 'puncture' flag on the armour piercing type so that the AI would know what to use them for. I think this is what that flag does.
------------------
Phil.
Trust In Me &
Fall As-well
[This message has been edited by WraithHost (edited 10-13-2001).]
-
Originally posted by WraithHost:
and the downpoints of your missile are?
It's range is limited, that's its main downpoint. That and the fact that it's not as compatible as some other missile types are.
The guys who designed it didn't design it to have a weakness. What designer in their right mind would intentionally give a flaw to something they were trying to sell on the basis of quality?
-
Er... any competent modeler? (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/rolleyes.gif)
It's not like killing stuff isn't easy enough already. Although having it used AGAINST the player would level the playing field somewhat, be very interesting to see which players survives anyway...
-
Design is a matter of compromises by it's very nature.
Do we put in a bigger engine so it goes faster , or more fules so it goes further, or a bigger warhead so it does more damage?
if we give it a bigger engine and more fuel the added weight of the fuel will counteract the more powerful engine keeping the same speed and range but it will allow us to carry a larger warhead.
If we add all of this the missile will be larger and fighters won't be able to carry as many. Then the enemy only needs to counter measure 5 missiles to avoid damage instead of 10 missiles.
we could make it harder to avoid by giving it a superior tracking system,
congratulations you just designed the Harpoon!!! (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/biggrin.gif)
see what I mean yet?
------------------
Phil.
Trust In Me &
Fall As-well
-
Quiet, you. (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/biggrin.gif)
-
your missiles suck! (ha! not really you guys are great!)
My SDS line of missiles which include teh Digger a High Payload Bomb, the Mincer a Area Detonation Missile and the smaller swarm varient.
Torpedos, crusie missiles, photon charges and others and also there!!! wooooo hoooo!
They have their bad points also.
-
Heh, I was reading down the thread, and I thought I'd say it, but Anduril beat me to it. Yep, it's lockarm - I hate it. Not sure why they put it in - but anyway, it's just One Of Those Tags™. (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/smile.gif)
-
ever notice how tornadoes have a sort of buck shot effect when fired without a lock?
This gives me an idea for a claymore mine type of weapon (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/smile.gif)
I'll let you know if I have any success.
------------------
Phil.
Trust In Me &
Fall As-well
-
Ah, I getcha. Cool. (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~freespace/ubb/noncgi/smile.gif) *bump*