Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Commander Zane on February 25, 2009, 10:48:05 am
-
This is just for people to give their favored combat style, pre-Great War era, without shielding or targeting, early Great War era, (before shielding is aquired) with targeting, and late Great War / post-Great War era, with shielding and targeting.
It doesn't really matter for me, a dogfight is a dogfight but all-in-all, without shielding whatever mission you play has to have small numbers of ships or else nothing has a chance of surviving.
Like imagine Dilmah G's High Noon if it was set up to be fought as a Terran Vs. Vasudan mission before shielding was implemented, I think it would end up being extremely difficult. ;)
Now if I could figure out how to make a poll...
-
Snail loves combat without shields!
*is not Snail*
-
The TVWP needs to have stripes added to your enemies.
Because shooting at your friends is not fun, man.
-
I also use Fast Mod to make dogfighting more fun, but one thing I want to know is if there's any way to make aspect missiles not lose its lock on a target when it's been fired, the Crossbow's the closest thing to doing that but it's still possible to dodge it and force it to lose track of you.
Something like the QMAAM on AC4 where you're forced to endure 20 entire seconds of dodging that damn missile as it constantly turns back to try to hit you again and again.
-
I refuse to acknowledge the lack of targeting in TVWP. I even hacked the missions to put it back.
I personally like the no-shields fighting, especially the more elaborate missions I've made using it for Twist of Fate. I have a campaign idea I might work on, set in the late 2320s, where your radar range is set to 6000-10000 meters, which would allow Vasudan ships to appear without jumping in (by closing into sensor range) and make combat more tactical.
-
I like fighting with shields, because then you can actually survive a few Horus on your tail.
-
You're a careless pilot who needs to learn evasive maneuvers and/or wingman management, then. An Apollo might not be able to outrun a Horus, but you definitely can out-turn a Horus. Make some sharp turns and the Horus will go wide and lose track of you, and you can use friendly ships to distract or destroy them. Many people have trouble with no-shields combat because they have poor situational awareness, tactics, and flight skills, and expect their shields, which are greatly boosted by lower difficulties, to bail them out. No shields means you actually have to pay attention to enemies. The way shields recharge faster on lower difficulties is a big crutch.
-
I quite liked the no-targeting style of combat in TVWP. It took a bit to get used to it, and you really had to pay attention to who was who (it helped when the two sides flew different ships in the mission). With the maneuverability, it really felt like a dogfight; I had to jockey for position before firing instead of just launching off a volley at range and destroying enemies left and right.
-
Second-Great-War era intercept is where it's at. Suicide Kings, FTW!
-
I refuse to acknowledge the lack of targeting in TVWP. I even hacked the missions to put it back.
I personally like the no-shields fighting, especially the more elaborate missions I've made using it for Twist of Fate. I have a campaign idea I might work on, set in the late 2320s, where your radar range is set to 6000-10000 meters, which would allow Vasudan ships to appear without jumping in (by closing into sensor range) and make combat more tactical.
I have TVWPD and targeting only becomes available when the "subspace sensors" are developed.
Plus an FS1 Fast Mod would be interesting, if not very difficult.
-
I quite liked the no-targeting style of combat in TVWP. It took a bit to get used to it, and you really had to pay attention to who was who (it helped when the two sides flew different ships in the mission). With the maneuverability, it really felt like a dogfight; I had to jockey for position before firing instead of just launching off a volley at range and destroying enemies left and right.
T-V war combat with targeting isn't that easy either, especially since the lack of shields makes ship's target profiles smalle rand the increased engine power makes them go faster and use AB more. Once you shake that Horus I mentioned earlier and the tables are turned, it's quite challenging to shoot one down because it can pretty much escape the effective range of your weapons at will, missiles are slower and track less effectively than in FS2 (compare Twist of Fate's Cobra missile to the Harpoon--you'll never hit an enemy with Cobras with a side-on shot at 400 meters) and hitting enemies is harder in general. TVWP combat is just plain irritating. Even modern jets have targeting computers and lead indicators (called "pippers" in real life).
I refuse to acknowledge the lack of targeting in TVWP. I even hacked the missions to put it back.
I personally like the no-shields fighting, especially the more elaborate missions I've made using it for Twist of Fate. I have a campaign idea I might work on, set in the late 2320s, where your radar range is set to 6000-10000 meters, which would allow Vasudan ships to appear without jumping in (by closing into sensor range) and make combat more tactical.
I have TVWPD and targeting only becomes available when the "subspace sensors" are developed.
Plus an FS1 Fast Mod would be interesting, if not very difficult.
Yes, I know you get targeting once you get the "subspace sensors". It still sucks not having a feature which already exists in the 21st century three hundred years later.
-
Not to mention either the weapons have horrendous shot convergence or the HUD reticle was accidently made off-center.
(compare Twist of Fate's Cobra missile to the Harpoon--you'll never hit an enemy with Cobras with a side-on shot at 400 meters)
Those damn missiles scream AIM-4 Falcon, out of the tens of thousands of Falcon missiles that were produced only FOUR have ever hit their target.
Yes, I know you get targeting once you get the "subspace sensors". It still sucks not having a feature which already exists in the 21st century three hundred years later.
That also brings up another question, we already have all-aspect heat seeking missiles that can aquire lock of a heat signature from an aircraft that's behind you, as well as active radar homing missiles, which basically fit the FreeSpace aspect missiles, why are heat seeking missiles on FreeSpace so poorly guided and aspect missiles are a "new" thing? ;)
-
(compare Twist of Fate's Cobra missile to the Harpoon--you'll never hit an enemy with Cobras with a side-on shot at 400 meters)
Those damn missiles scream AIM-4 Falcon, out of the tens of thousands of Falcon missiles that were produced only FOUR have ever hit their target.
Have you actually fired Cobras, or are you talking about TVWP's completely useless missiles? Cobras are very effective when fired while on an enemy's six, and firing them at an Osiris or Amun means an almost guaranteed hit. Once you get a feel for the proper angle and range to fire them at, they're the ultimate Horus/Thoth removers. Now, MX-50s, on the other hand, are pretty much hopeless.
-
Only when I'm behind something flying straight-and-level.
-
My favorite combat comes from one mission, The Hammer and the Anvil, from FS1. It's the only mission where you fly unshielded, but have Avengers and you can target the Shivans. It feels like combat on the harder difficulties, but without the raping that happens when your wingmates die and you're totally outnumbered.
It's the perfect balance of firepower and dogfighting with the urgency that comes with unshielded combat. I like flying glass cannons.
-
I found out that nothing happens if you save the Andromeda on that mission.
-
My favorite combat comes from one mission, The Hammer and the Anvil, from FS1. It's the only mission where you fly unshielded, but have Avengers and you can target the Shivans. It feels like combat on the harder difficulties, but without the raping that happens when your wingmates die and you're totally outnumbered.
It's the perfect balance of firepower and dogfighting with the urgency that comes with unshielded combat. I like flying glass cannons.
I imagine you also enjoy The Babylon Project, then?
-
Never played the Babylon 5 or Battlestar Galactica TCs. I'm utterly unfamiliar with their universes. :nervous:
-
I am rather in the middle.
You see, my usual strategy is to get behind the enemy, press "M" and rape it to pieces. With shields, it is harder - but when I have no shields, then I am dying much more often.
After playing FS2, replaying FS1 became a lot harder.
-
Well... I have a profound dislike of missions where I need to escort multiple weak targets, like convoys of freighters or science cruisers or escape pods... There's just too little margin of error and if the convoy is spread wide enough, you can't do everything yourself, and the wingmen require very specific management to be of any use. Sometimes it makes me wish I had a way to assign a wing to attack an enemy wing (like several waves of Seraphims called Aries wing or whatever).
Space superiority sorties and intercept missions to defend corvettes, destroyers or installations are usually great fun, though. Especially if you have several wings at your disposal; my favourite tactics is to give Subachs or Mekhu's or other rapid-fire weapons to wingmen, then in mission make them form on me, then I target the closest enemy and hit C-3-1... the enemy usually dies rather fast, and it's oddly satisfactory to do unto them as they would do to me... One-hit dual missile kills are quite satisfying, but so is ripping to the enemy with primary fire.
As far as flight model goes, I like BtRL and TBP models more than FS2's venerable but a bit boring railroad dogfighting. In fact in BtRL I preferred to use the glide mode almost exclusively in fights, controlling the vector of the ship with lateral thrusters and afterburner bursts.
-
Snail loves combat without shields!
*is not Snail*
Unshielded combat feels a lot more intense. You actually have to dogfight. When you do get shields all you need to do is kill the hundreds of enemy fighters one by one, because none of them can hurt you. Without shields however you actually have to do evasive maneuvers and keep on the move.
Shields just kinda water everything down. Still fun, but not as fun as unshielded combat IMO.
-
I don't disagree, nor do I mock. Your opinions are well-substantiated.
-
Fighters make headlines, bombers make history. 'nuff said.
-
Unshielded bombing is retardedly aggravating - its about finding an odd protrusion where you can ram the bomb into and continue to afterburn past while praying the shockwave doesn't clip your bomber and kill it. More aggravating is how your wingmen unload their bombs 1 click away from their target, and continue to fly on top of the bomb until the bomb gets intercepted, at which point the entirety of your bomber support gets vaporized by a single one their own bombs being intercepted by a blob turret. Those AIs are ****ing geniuses.
But other than that, unshielded dogfighting is indeed better than shielded.
-
I honestly prefer shielded combat to unshielded, but this is because I'm one of those overconfident idiots who strafes the surfaces of Cains and Typhons for kicks. Surgical strikes and bombing is made so much easier when you've got a blanket of energy to dull the enemy impacts. I suppose it depends on the person's play style as to whether they like shielded or unshielded.
I'll also tolerate no targeting for fighter craft, because targeting them seems to make them get out of the way. By leaving enemy bombers untargeted, they keep going as I blow them up from behind. But of course, I'll need my precious targets back for any ship larger than that.
-
Shielded combat just makes the game much easier - almost insanely easy in FS1 even on hard difficulty. TBH, I don't know how many pilots died in a simple unguarded convoy raid back in the T-V War.
I guess AA beams changed all of that.
-
I don't mind going unshielded in a fighter, I'd rather have the extra protection if I'm forced to fly straight-and-level for five seconds to lob some torpedo.
-
That's why heavy bombers in the pre-FS1 era like the Osiris have 600+ hitpoints.
-
That doesn't help when a bomb explodes in your face.
It will do several thousand damage...
More of an issue with the AI and their tendancy to let loose with bombs from far away and ride the shockwave when they get intercepted...but it's still annoying.
Bombing without shields = No Fun.
-
That's why heavy bombers in the pre-FS1 era like the Osiris have 600+ hitpoints.
But do you fly them at times when they don't have shielding installed?
-
That doesn't help when a bomb explodes in your face.
It will do several thousand damage...
More of an issue with the AI and their tendancy to let loose with bombs from far away and ride the shockwave when they get intercepted...but it's still annoying.
Bombing without shields = No Fun.
In Twist of Fate, the shockwave only extends out to 15 meters. Close in, launch the bomb, turn, and afterburn, and you're in the clear. Shooting down bombs is probably more dangeorus than launching them.
That's why heavy bombers in the pre-FS1 era like the Osiris have 600+ hitpoints.
But do you fly them at times when they don't have shielding installed?
You fly against them in the mission with the Plato, and in Twist of Fate, you will actually fly the GTB Atlas, which has 700 hitpoints.
-
You do? I thought there were Osiris bombers in that mission but they were with the Aten that gets splashed by the Shivans.
It doesn't matter what bombers I'm flying against, even something as messed up as the Vindhyachal, as long as I'm in a bomber with shielding of its own.
-
I've played way too much of FS railroad style combat to get used to B5 and BtRL, but they are pretty fun to play.
Non-shielded is fun sometimes, but not when I'm lazy. o_o
Never really liked no-targeting, doesn't really make any sense.
-
It does when there's a whole wing of bombers in front of you and the auto target selects the one on the other side of the wing. It's easier just to use your judgement, since it takes "precious" seconds to press "y".
-
My personnal preference is playing with no shield, high dampering on all axis and on the whole ship [pitch yaw and roll] (have glide mode + lateral thruster is better too ) , 10 missile max and a short range but deadly primary.
I really dislike when an engagement can last more than 2/3 minute per target cause of shield or inefficient weapon (i mean even when they shoot at me).
Shield make the game less intensive and doesn't require much situation awardness.
-
Shield make the game less intensive and doesn't require much situation awardness.
A sentry gun will kill you with Fast Mod enabled regardless of shields. :P
-
while I acknowledge unshielded combat is faster-paced and more intense, I prefer shielded combat because of 2 reasons:
1: I played fs2 before fs1. I played fs2 for nearly a year before I bought fs1, and thus I just can't tear myself away from beams (i simply love them, although i have had random deaths from beam fire more than once :) "avoid the beam and you won't get hit, pilot", as Command said...
2: I've always despised small, fast fighters. I'm the type to play heavy assault. Give me an Ares or a Herc Mk II and i'll run the gauntlet wiping everything in my path. (my hit ratio for primaries is above 70% with all my callsigns, I rarely miss :D ) I also love to strafe cruisers and corvettes and wiping out their turrets. I know a perseus is fast enough for that, but getting past the flak is much easier with heavy assault, and you can dish out way more damage ;)
For fighter-on-fighter missions though, Unshielded combat rules.
-
Shields don't make the difference between life and death against beams however, you might as well be fighting FS2 armed cruisers in early FS1 fighters, so your first reason contradicts itself.
And fast fighters are fun because I like having the 50 / 50 chance to dodge big beamz.
-
My preferences:
->Speed is life. Even in an Erynies I keep moving, rather than absorbing hit after hit, even if it means I'll lose a nasty firing solution. It's easier to get back on the enemies tail than to fix the hull during combat.
->I generally prefer to have shields, but then fighting against ships armed with Kaysers and Harpoons (or equivalent) is fun, since you can survive a stray bolt undamaged, but if the bad dude gets aim, see ya in the afterlife.
->I enjoy mixed missile and gun combat, everything from Trebs to slugfests on a 100 meter distance.
->I also don't use matching speeds. I set my throttle to 2/3 and either hit the burners and move closer when I get too far, or hit the burners and do a loop if I get too close. Generally with speed matching and a lead pursuit the distance gets smaller all the time, and if the bad dude slows down, I automatically make a target just as good as he does.
As for the targeting...
The first missions of the TVWP would look close to that of 2 F-22's meeting, except they'd see each other on radar at really close ranges. Other than that- forget BVR and med/long range missiles.
My theory is that stealthy ship design (although they don't all look like a Pegasus, RAM and jammers FTW) could be the reason why combat occurs at hundreds of meters rather than 100's of km, 5 clicks is considered ultra long range and missiles are easy to dodge.
As for beamz:
As soon as you see that muzzleglow, do a 90 degree turn away from it, and even if it hits you, you can afterburn out of it before it ends beaming, taking much smaller damage than if you kept going at it and took the whole duration of the shot.
-
Bombing without shields = No Fun.
Which is why, canonically, there are no bombing runs without shields, save for Good Luck, but the shockwaves in that one are watered down for this reason.
You realize there are no Tsunami-like torpedoes at the beginning of FS1. I believe T-V war era bombs either didn't have shockwaves or were just completely different in concept.
-
High-frag?
-
I'm in the speed is life category as well. It's kind of interesting in a shielded fighter if you remove all energy from shields and give it to engines and guns. Once you lose shields, its just like unshielded combat, but you're faster than before. I generally keep my hand depressed on the accelerate button unless I need to stay behind a bomber to rip it apart, and I can't live without my afterburners.
I prefer short range missile combat. That sounds really funny when you actually say it. Tempests are my favorite secondaries because it's basically a high-power dogfighter primary with ammo. Other than that, I use harpoons and hornets when I drop to about 300 meters to make it a little more challenging. The trebuchet just took all the fun out of missile fights.
I can't live without targeting some kind of ship. It doesn't even have to be the one I'm after lol. All I need is a little picture of it in the bottom left and I can hit it fairly easily. I have almost 73% accuracy with primaries, and 84% with secondaries, mostly tempests. That's mostly because I had the 'joystick demo' with only the first ten missions for about four years before I got retail, and four or five of those you can only use tempests/rockeyes.
Beams: I love beams. Beams are awesome. Beams make everything easier to hit when it slams the brakes on an unlucky fighter. The hit stops it or sends it corkscrewing away slowly.
-
I honestly prefer shielded combat to unshielded, but this is because I'm one of those overconfident idiots who strafes the surfaces of Cains and Typhons for kicks. Surgical strikes and bombing is made so much easier when you've got a blanket of energy to dull the enemy impacts. I suppose it depends on the person's play style as to whether they like shielded or unshielded.
What this man said. I'm very much a plow-through-everything sort of pilot, so I vastly prefer shields for the simple reason that they allow me to ignore most small-to-moderate enemy fire until I'm done plowing through whatever I'm trying to plow through. Even back when I first played FS1, and especially going back to it now, those unshielded missions generally prove to be rather frustrating, since I'm forced to take so much care avoiding enemy fire that I'm far less able to dish out damage on my own. It's no fun flying if you have to worry about every stray MX-50 knocking off half of your hull integrity. :p
(Also, the only time I ever use the match speed command is when I want to give my hands a rest during a long escort mission. It's probably the worst thing I could think of using during an actual dogfight. :p)
-
Which is why, canonically, there are no bombing runs without shields, save for Good Luck, but the shockwaves in that one are watered down for this reason.
Considering FS1 bombs can cut direct through your shields with their shockwave unlike FS2 bombs, the difference between shielded and unshielded bombing in that era is not as great as you might think.
However whenever I hear someone complain that shields water down the combat, it indicates to me that the game is being played on a lower difficulty, or mission design was not impressive. Three or four Thoths on medium can really ruin your day if you're not practiced in this sort of thing.
Yet, on the other hand, FS2 is not a dogfight simulator because it can't be, it doesn't have the means. This isn't Falcon 3.0 where you had a mode that let you keep track of your target visually. You can't fight the most immediate threat because it's difficult to be sure which one that is. About the only time you can really apply good dogfighting skills is missile defense: put it on your three/nine line, hit your burners, dump some decoys, pray, and break hard at the last second.
-
Actually you can bind a key to constantly view whichever ship you have targeted.
-
Actually you can bind a key to constantly view whichever ship you have targeted.
:jaw: What sort of magic is this?! I must know the secret!
-
Shields don't make the difference between life and death against beams however, you might as well be fighting FS2 armed cruisers in early FS1 fighters, so your first reason contradicts itself.
I explained badly. I meant the heavier fighter has more of a chance surviving assaults from anti-fighter beams. Of course big beams are deadly whatever happens and a faster ship has better chances but its rare that i have to afterburn my way out of a beam's path. Once though i died on a "beaming-after-death-before-turret-blows-up" death after blowing a a cruiser which promted the end of the mission. I actually died from big beam fire while my jump engines were starting (speed at 35, meaning i was close to warping out as node entry speed seems to be 38-42 m/s.)
-
The cut-to-3rd person limit is that, but the actual jump out speed is almost exactly 40. Why can't it be the ~200-300 for big ships? It would make things a lot easier (I've actually been beamed to death while watching my ship warp out, and done it to hercs and ulysses :lol:0
-
Actually you can bind a key to constantly view whichever ship you have targeted.
:jaw: What sort of magic is this?! I must know the secret!
Misc control tab, Target Padlock View.
Although I should mention that keeping your reticle on the lead indicator (At least for me) becomes significantly more difficult.
The cut-to-3rd person limit is that, but the actual jump out speed is almost exactly 40. Why can't it be the ~200-300 for big ships? It would make things a lot easier (I've actually been beamed to death while watching my ship warp out, and done it to hercs and ulysses :lol:0
And I've literally had my charging sequence interupted for five klicks until I freaking died. :doubt:
-
Like trying to take out respawning dragons in a Herc mark II, Interruption galore. I also think that your shields disappear as soon as you press Alt-J
-
They don't disappear, and thank god they don't.
-
Well, i seem to die whenever i try to bug out.
-
Because anything that dinks your ship while you're waiting to jump makes your ship move and makes the sequence last longer.
Maybe with one ship on you that doesn't have many guns won't do much unless they're Morning Stars, but have a bunch of ships on you and you just never jump. Like I said before, I ended up five kilometers away from a jump node before I finally popped.
-
I hate that. Struggle through a mission, try to jump, and you get constantly bumped around by enemy fighters until you either try to kill them, or die.
I almost always prefer going intercept. I like the fact that going full burns, you can sometimes outrun missiles without taking any evasive maneuvers at all. Also find it much easier to get away from those AAA beams.
-
When it comes to me and beams, the best defense is to not move at all. :doubt:
Seriously, I get hit maybe once every 20 bursts when I stay still...
Then when I'm flying around it's every other burst...
-
When it comes to me and beams, the best defense is to not move at all. :doubt:
Seriously, I get hit maybe once every 20 bursts when I stay still...
Then when I'm flying around it's every other burst...
:wtf: This means that we're overpaying those who are firing the cannons.
-
:wakka:
-
Maybe because the game engine is trying to predict where you will be going, and shoots there. Odd.
-
* Whistles for the coders.
-
The coders really, really don't like working with the AI.
-
Maybe because the game engine is trying to predict where you will be going, and shoots there. Odd.
They'd aim for your lead indicator wouldn't they? So if your not moving neither should the lead indicator, or are the firing ships moving? Maybe that's having an effect :confused:
-
They stay still, I just seem to avoid almost all AAA beam fire just by not moving.