Hard Light Productions Forums

Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: ChronoReverse on December 07, 2009, 09:40:19 pm

Title: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 07, 2009, 09:40:19 pm
I haven't been able to find something explaining how missile damage works and hope someone could either point out where it could be found or explain it to me.

A Harpoon does 100 damage (100 armor scale, 80 shield scale) and a pair of them is capable of immediately destroying a Perseus fighter.  But the Perseus has 350 shields and 265 hitpoints.  I can't understand how the scaling is supposed to work given that.

The wiki says
Code: [Select]
Hitpoints: The number of hitpoints the craft has. A hit decreases this value, in regard of the damage value * armor factor.
Shields: The number of shield hitpoints the craft has. A hit decreases this value, in regard of the damage value * shield factor.
If this is true, then a single Harpoon should easily destroy a Perseus but that's not the case.  On the other hand, if the damage is 100 and 80, even a pair of Harpoons wouldn't be able to break the hull of the Perseus.  I'm not even sure if the damage to the hull is whatever is "left over" from the blast after penetrating the shields.

I appreciate any help and please let me know if this is the wrong place to ask.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 07, 2009, 09:48:28 pm
A hit does not do separate damage to hulls and shields. A hit does damage in one lump, and if the shields fail, the damage left over is taken by the hull. So if you had an impact doing 100 damage and a ship with 80 shields on a certain quarter, the shields would take 80 and the hull 20.

Keep in mind that the shield hitpointss are split among the four quadrants. A Perseus has 87.5 shield hitpoints on each side.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: General Battuta on December 07, 2009, 09:48:32 pm
You're neglecting the damage done by the missile's blast. This is additional damage on top of the missile's own damage value.

At least I think so.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 07, 2009, 09:49:52 pm
Good point, I had forgotten that. A missile hit does double the stated damage due to the blast effect. A Perseus can take 362.5 damage on a single point, this is slightly less than the total damage of 400 done by double harpoons.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Solatar on December 07, 2009, 10:00:52 pm
This thread seems to be deja vu...Did we have this discussion a few days ago?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 07, 2009, 10:08:39 pm
I asked this question in the General FreeSpace Discussion forum in the Myrmidon thread but didn't get a reply.


@General Battuta
Ah, that's the missing piece I'm looking for.  So anything caught in the inner blast radius receives the full damage a second time?  I suppose the outer blast radius just attenuates damage from 100% to 0% as you move outwards.  This explains everything I've been having trouble with.  I appreciate the help.



Actually, since this thread is here anyway, how does lead and lag pursuit work?  Does lag pursuit continuously point the missile directly at its target while lead pursuit continuously points the missile at the calculated collision point for the instantaneous velocities of the missile and its target?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Solatar on December 07, 2009, 10:22:53 pm
I asked this question in the General FreeSpace Discussion forum in the Myrmidon thread but didn't get a reply.


Ahh, that was it. I couldn't find the topic. I wasn't trying to "catch you" on reposting or anything, just wanted to make sure I was sane. ;)

As far as I can tell, lag pursuit "follows" the target while lead pursuit attempts to go for a collision course.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 08, 2009, 12:17:56 am
There are usually three different types of pursuits... Lag, pure and lead pursuits.

Lag means that the nose or the flight vector points behind the target (scaler < 0). Pure means that the nose or flight vector is continuously kept on target (scaler ~ 0) and lead means that it is kept in front of the target (scaler > 0). In FS by default the aspect seekers use lead pursuit while heat seekers use pure pursuit.

Code: [Select]
+Target Lead Scaler:Only in nightly builds. Its a float and goes right after the 'seeker strength' entry. Setting it to 1.0 disables the whole setting.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Aardwolf on December 08, 2009, 12:31:31 am
Since what version?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 08, 2009, 12:33:22 am
Thanks for that information.  I used the term "lag pursuit" because that's what I've seen people call what the heat seakers do.  I always thought that it seemed odd to call it lag pursuit.  Your information makes perfect sense to me.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 08, 2009, 12:43:01 am
r5502
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 08, 2009, 12:48:07 am
Incidentally, I heard that the swarm missiles like the Hornets use la^H^Hpure pursuit while corkscrew types like the Tornado uses lead pursuit (just like normal aspect seekers).  Is this the case or do both just use the aspect lead pursuit?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: General Battuta on December 08, 2009, 12:52:45 am
What you heard was correct. Swarm missiles do not use lead pursuit.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Dilmah G on December 08, 2009, 04:17:01 am
I really don't see the logic in "Lag Pursuit", it's bloody useless unless you're on his six. Heh, gameplay balance I guess.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 08, 2009, 05:54:52 am
Or 12' and he doesn't move, otherwise the missile tries to loop'de'loop to his 6'. :P
And miss horribly.

There are usually three different types of pursuits... Lag, pure and lead pursuits.

Lag means that the nose or the flight vector points behind the target (scaler < 0). Pure means that the nose or flight vector is continuously kept on target (scaler ~ 0) and lead means that it is kept in front of the target (scaler > 0). In FS by default the aspect seekers use lead pursuit while heat seekers use pure pursuit.

Code: [Select]
+Target Lead Scaler:Only in nightly builds. Its a float and goes right after the 'seeker strength' entry. Setting it to 1.0 disables the whole setting.
So is this like an easier way of determining the missile's guidance system? How do you use this flag?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 08, 2009, 06:18:11 am
Some explanations... Using big values on either side will cause the missiles to miss their targets. Option for lag pursuit allows for bit more cinematic missiles to be made however it works pretty well when used with smaller values (say -0.2 to -0.4) but this depends on the mod and the rest of the weapon parameters. They wont try to loop around the target. and should target stay still they should home directly towards it. Extreme lead on the other hand may cause missiles to overshoot the target.

So is this like an easier way of determining the missile's guidance system? How do you use this flag?
:wtf: You did read the text you quoted?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 08, 2009, 06:23:02 am
Yes, I was wondering if < 0, ~ 0, and > 0 were used. Unless I know exactly what to do with a flag I'm not going to try it myself because I've caused a crash every time I tried messing with a new feature. What I meant in the first place with the question is if it can be / is used to overwrite the coded seekers from the HEAT and ASPECT variable.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 08, 2009, 06:27:17 am
Its not used to overwrite existing seeker types. It just redefines on how they will pursuit their target. Existing limitations and benefits of the heat, aspect and javelin type seekers still exist and those wont be affected. As for '<', '~', and '>' it was just used to describe what will happen with different values.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 08, 2009, 06:52:49 am
Just looked at the Wiki after some time, "no lifeleft penalty" sounds like something I've been wanting to see, with this missiles won't suddenly explode if you dodge them by making hard turns?

i.e. like Independence War 2 missiles.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: asyikarea51 on December 08, 2009, 07:14:38 am
missiles won't suddenly explode if you dodge them by making hard turns?

/starts seeing Ace Combat in his head

? QAAM-ish missiles possible in FS already?

Then again a missile like that would be pretty scary... and even more scary if missile lock could be scripted to be nearly instantaneous (or at least, based on the player fighter class and missile type)... :shaking:

Miss once, vector-thrust around, go for the kill again, miss twice, vector-thrust again, try one last time, if it still misses, then it just runs out of fuel and explodes or something... Boom...
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 08, 2009, 07:25:52 am
It can have instantaneous lock, make +Min Lock Time a ridiculously low number (Decimal number).

A question about missile lock, can it be done where the missile has a high range but aquires lock at close distance?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 09, 2009, 11:24:14 am
High lifetime and/or velocity but limited weapon range should do the trick
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 09, 2009, 12:45:15 pm
Isn't range determined by lifetime x speed?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 09, 2009, 01:19:50 pm
Yes it is.. but AI uses the separately defined weapon range variable as the maximum firing range if (and only if) the set limit is smaller than lifetime x speed. Of course human player could fire such weapons beyond the weapon range, in this case using the flag which the makes the target lock required before the weapon can be fired can be a clever move.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 09, 2009, 01:26:07 pm
I want to try experimenting with the Harpoon so it acts like an AC4 QAAM, what would I change to make the lock-on distance shorter than the maximum range?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 09, 2009, 02:18:29 pm
Without having any idea what AC4 QUAAM is...

Recipe for missile which could keep homing even if target evades it from stock Harpoon
(see FSwiki for getting these to their proper places - and without the "no lifeleft penalty" this could work on 3.6.10 but otherwise recent nightly build is required)
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 09, 2009, 02:20:08 pm
Ace Combat 4's Quick-maneuvering Air-to-Air Missile.

Sweet I'll try this out.

Where does +Weapon Range go? There's no example on the Wiki that shows where it goes, unless the whole list is in order.
Nevermind I got it! :D AWESOME!!! :eek2:
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 09, 2009, 02:46:12 pm
The QAAM missile is capable of reacquiring lock even when it misses a target.  That is, it's able of reacquiring a target that got behind it.

While in AC5/0/6 it's been nerfed, in AC4 the homing capability is game breaking (although you can only carry very few of them).
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 09, 2009, 02:50:27 pm
Me and whoever it ever was that I'd be playing on AC4 Vs. mode with would get mad at each other for spamming QAAMs all over the sky. :D
It would be priceless when I'd own the other person flying the X-02 while I flew the F-4. :P

It's also the same as the Spiculum IR missile from Wing Commander, a missile that would not be fooled by chaff or hard maneuvers, it either kills you or it runs out of fuel because you managed to run long enough. :P

****ing hell I need to play Wing Commander again.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 09, 2009, 03:40:38 pm
I never understood the name of the IR missile. You've got three missiles (dart, javelin, pilum) named after pointy throwing weapons, and a fourth named after a medical instrument used to pry intimate orifices open.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: SpardaSon21 on December 09, 2009, 04:17:53 pm
Uh, its the Spiculum, not the Speculum.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: ChronoReverse on December 09, 2009, 05:49:38 pm
Quote
A spiculum is a late Roman spear that replaced the pilum at around 250AD as the infantryman's main throwing javelin.
Typos are bad eh?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 09, 2009, 08:15:02 pm
Indeed. :P
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 10, 2009, 08:58:28 pm
It does make me wonder what a "speculum" missile would do to its target though. Tear apart the exhaust nozzle? Like the medieval torture pear*, but for spacecraft. :P

* Explanation of the pear: spoilered due to being rather unpleasant:
 
Spoiler:
The pear was a device used by the Inquisition (Roman, I'm not sure about the Spanish) and other medieval powers. It was a three-lobed pear-shaped thing with a screw in the middle. What the torturer did was put it into the orifice with which you had sinned (mouth for blasphemy or sedition, vagina for women committing adultery, anus for sodomy), and turn the screw. The three lobes would fan out and pry you open extremely wide, doing horrible things to whatever part of the body it was put in.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 10, 2009, 10:58:53 pm
why probe what you can nuke?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 10, 2009, 11:07:42 pm
Because the idea of a ship being torn apart by a rocket-propelled giant anal pear is funny?
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Bobboau on December 10, 2009, 11:15:11 pm
and they didn't clean it between uses
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: asyikarea51 on December 13, 2009, 08:49:33 am
I tried tabling Ace Combat-style missile lock in FSO once, but I haven't found any good pixel settings for anything reasonably fast (since FSO goes by missile type with no bonus/penalty based on fighter class), anyone knows?

I've only played the PSP one so I don't know much... but the lock speed for normal missiles (not the fancy QAAM, XMAA, etc) looks to be kinda based on how "modern" the fighter is rather than the missile type ... but it's just the targeter dashing to the target, sometimes all the way offscreen-to-offscreen, and locking on immediately with little to no catch-up penalty...

FSO's targeter when I set some high number, it goes in fast, but if I miss the first lock, it will just go waay off and the re-lock takes forever... or something... I forgot what it did, but it definitely wasn't what I was after...
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Thaeris on December 13, 2009, 11:50:25 am
It does make me wonder what a "speculum" missile would do to its target though. Tear apart the exhaust nozzle? Like the medieval torture pear*, but for spacecraft. :P

* Explanation of the pear: spoilered due to being rather unpleasant:
 
Spoiler:
The pear was a device used by the Inquisition (Roman, I'm not sure about the Spanish) and other medieval powers. It was a three-lobed pear-shaped thing with a screw in the middle. What the torturer did was put it into the orifice with which you had sinned (mouth for blasphemy or sedition, vagina for women committing adultery, anus for sodomy), and turn the screw. The three lobes would fan out and pry you open extremely wide, doing horrible things to whatever part of the body it was put in.

Ahh, so that's what those things were called.

Here's the modern terminology:
Spoiler:
The Killdoh...

 :lol:
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 14, 2009, 12:22:39 pm
id like to have laser guided weapons. yes they can be (and have been, sorta) scripted, but then the ai would get confused and not use them correctly. anyway the idea is that the missile goes where the crosshair is pointing, assuming its pointing at an object. the idea is you have to maintain sighting to get it to work. when the target is not sighted, it just flys in a straight line. take it a step further and it becomews an ssm weapon that doesnt really enter subspace, targeting laser and all. i dont so much want the laser to hit the target its pointed at but also the exact location along the hull that its pointing at.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 14, 2009, 01:49:12 pm
Something like the UT3 AVRiL, I think that would be sweet. It's fun dumbfiring it then having it 180 to a target. :D
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 14, 2009, 08:30:14 pm
or the carl g in farcry 2. fire it up, then lock on. death from above!
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 14, 2009, 08:59:45 pm
That can all be done, I kept the Harpoon like that just to mess around with Into The Lion's Den, near-instantaneous lock, would circle four times before exceeding lifetime.

Hmm, the entire post I was replying to is gone.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: asyikarea51 on December 14, 2009, 10:32:54 pm
Fox two, fox two!
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 15, 2009, 09:41:07 am
i dont want a missile that locks onto a target, i want a missile that locks on a location.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Aardwolf on December 15, 2009, 11:26:30 am
you said that already
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Wanderer on December 17, 2009, 08:46:17 am
i dont want a missile that locks onto a target, i want a missile that locks on a location.
To lock onto a set location on the target's hull (which should be readily doable) or one which homes onto a spot 'marked' with ships crosshairs (much, much more complex to do)
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 17, 2009, 08:48:18 am
Laser-guided, like Targeting Laser but without the subspace-barfing-missiles part. Homing in on where you point.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 17, 2009, 09:40:57 am
That would be awesome, but for this sort of thing I'd like the ability to have the laser integrated into the secondary weapon rather than used as a primary. I'd finally have laser-guided bombs in Wings!
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 17, 2009, 06:44:08 pm
That would be awesome, but for this sort of thing I'd like the ability to have the laser integrated into the secondary weapon rather than used as a primary. I'd finally have laser-guided bombs in Wings!
why have tertiary weapons never been completed? this is a perfect application for it. for me im thinking about either scripting an 'infrared beam' which is essentially a straight line with no visible graphics. i also thought about using a sensor turret, which would have a targeting beam equipped, but that kinda takes out some of the skill required. im not sure if weapon collision hooks work on beams, but those maybe could be used to report the impact location to code which guides the missile.

scripting needs a lot of work i think. right now scripting essentially provides a way to hack around certain behaviors and features in the game, what we need is a way to make the game work with scripting. meaning that the c code wants to do one thing and is allowed to do it, then when the script hook rolls around, all that work is cast aside wasting that cpu time, and script is run to do things the way i want them to be done. my physics scripts are a good example of this. i essentially go "that velocity is wrong, gtfo of my way while i punch in my own vector". for missiles i say "its a hear seeker with a turn time of about a million." the game runs all the code needed to put that heat seeker on its ways then i go "nope do this instead" its all brute force and little efficiency, no matter how good your lua code is.

better way is have a 'scripted' seeker type and a hook that runs when a weapon of that type is found. for something like physicsi need more of a general override and a hook (or multiple hooks if theres an init or code which needs to run after other things have happened). you would be exposed to all the relevant vars, thrust forces, collision forces, etc, then i compute forward velocity and angular velocity. i could rant all day about the inefficiencies of scripting and how many of the features i script in feel like cheap dirty hacks.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Woolie Wool on December 18, 2009, 12:00:34 am
Does the AI work with your physics and aerodynamics scripts? They seem exceedingly poor at situations that fall outside normal FreeSpace parameters. In Wings they have difficulty understanding that there can be such a thing as a ground and that flying into it at 300 m/s will result in certain death.
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Commander Zane on December 18, 2009, 07:45:54 am
:lol:
Title: Re: Secondary Missile Damage Mechanics
Post by: Nuke on December 18, 2009, 10:14:46 am
^this