Author Topic: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition  (Read 365657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2797
  • Thanked: 1056 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3480 on: December 03, 2023, 05:05:51 AM »
Because there wasn't any meaningful decision to it - you wanted an Excel sheet to find the sweetspot and then that was it until you hit the next engine level. Not using the sweetspot just meant playing with a handicap for no reason.
 

Offline Mint Keyphase

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3481 on: December 03, 2023, 05:07:40 AM »
Judging by what I see in the changelog, every time an update comes, there is always a feature that everyone has to COMPLETELY relearn...
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11684
  • Thanked: 20492 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3482 on: December 03, 2023, 06:02:12 AM »
How do I get the missile chance to hit higher? The latest update makes it kinda hard?

The individual chance-to-hit can be improved by increasing engine boost, devoting more space to engine overall, adding terminal guidance, including ECCM, using multiple warheads or adding retargeting capability. The overall number of hits can be increased by adding decoys, improving missile ECM and using laser warheads.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3005
  • Thanked: 2259 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3483 on: December 03, 2023, 09:02:17 AM »
It is also worth noting that Agility led to a weird balance where AMMs became extremely dominant vs ASMs at higher tech levels, to the point where ASMs were completely cost-ineffective due to high AMM hit chances. The current system gives us a lot more tools for both ASMs and AMMs but should ensure that missile warfare remains viable and interesting for most of the game.

In the lead-up to 2.2 some people were discussing using AMMs larger than size 1 with the retargeting capability so that they will eventually hit the targeted ASM even if it takes a few tries. That's an interesting idea worth looking at IMO - in addition to all the others!
 

Offline Mint Keyphase

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3484 on: December 03, 2023, 09:08:44 AM »
Well, considering that missile interception usually happens head-on, having a missile turn around and try to hit again is kinda weird.
Semi-related question, can missiles switch targets on the fly?
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3005
  • Thanked: 2259 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3485 on: December 03, 2023, 09:14:23 AM »
Semi-related question, can missiles switch targets on the fly?

If their target is destroyed or lost, missiles with onboard sensors can attack a new target in sensor range.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mint Keyphase

Offline Mint Keyphase

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3486 on: December 03, 2023, 09:15:14 AM »
Only active sensors or any sensors?
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3005
  • Thanked: 2259 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3487 on: December 03, 2023, 09:16:42 AM »
Only active sensors or any sensors?

Pretty sure passives will work too. They should, but I know there's been many bugs related to missile retargeting (e.g., mines not working) in previous C# versions so someone who has used these capabilities will need to confirm as I've never bothered.
 

Offline db48x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • d
  • Posts: 641
  • Thanked: 200 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3488 on: December 03, 2023, 09:59:21 AM »
Has anybody tried tiny commercial space stations as sensor pickets?

Thinking about the problem of how to provide long-term sensor presence with low ongoing costs. Obviously these stations would have very limited capabilities since they are limited to commercial sensors, but they also should be very cheap and small, and you could probably carry them in a hangar to drop at points of interest.

Yes, many have done that.

Another option is to make bouys. A bouy is a missile with sensors, no warhead, no engine, and no fuel. The reactor will keep the sensors going forever and missiles have no upkeep, so bouys are a cheap way to monitor small locations. Ships can drop the bouy out of a missile launcher, or you can put the bouy on top of a transfer stage. The former requires the ship to travel to the destination to be monitored, which is fine for jump points but can be contraindicated for planets. A bouy on a missile can travel to a planet on its own, and no real harm is done if something shoots it down.

When I use bouys I design my survey ships to carry a few on missiles and few to be dropped off at jump points.

Unless you're going for deep space locations DST installations are probably the regular way of handling this problem. However, a tiny picket station could be easier to transport.

Deep Space Tracking systems can have a lot of range, but they are quite a lot heavier than a bouy or a civilian station. You also have to place them on a body, which means it will orbit and get out of position. That makes them more situational. Not necessarily useless, however.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11684
  • Thanked: 20492 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3489 on: December 03, 2023, 10:17:16 AM »
When I use bouys I design my survey ships to carry a few on missiles and few to be dropped off at jump points.

I am definitely stealing that idea! I use recon drones, but hadn't considered leaving buoys in my wake as I explore.
 
The following users thanked this post: db48x

Offline superstrijder15

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • s
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3490 on: December 03, 2023, 10:57:32 AM »


Deep Space Tracking systems can have a lot of range, but they are quite a lot heavier than a bouy or a civilian station. You also have to place them on a body, which means it will orbit and get out of position. That makes them more situational. Not necessarily useless, however.

I only use these on purpose because
1) I RP that this is just the amount of stuff needed to do the FTL communication with HQ and fleets
and
2) I think it looks really funny when you have 10 different asteroids in a circle all of them with 1 or 2 DSTs to track 1 jump point
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3005
  • Thanked: 2259 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3491 on: December 03, 2023, 01:52:13 PM »
When I use bouys I design my survey ships to carry a few on missiles and few to be dropped off at jump points.

I am definitely stealing that idea! I use recon drones, but hadn't considered leaving buoys in my wake as I explore.

I usually try to put enough magazine space into a survey or scout ship to drop about 10-15 buoys before returning to base, unless I'm using commercial JP monitors for roleplay reasons. "Launch Ready Ordnance" is a great feature!  ;D
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1339
  • Thanked: 595 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3492 on: December 03, 2023, 05:40:44 PM »
Another option is to make buoys.

Woooo, Unless you want to end up with several dots on your screen impossible to recognize, you need to remember to name waypoints and stuff because the remove Salvo tracker doesn't have a "location" but it tracks targets. I just did a quick and dirty setup to show you how hard it could be otherwise.

First just launched ready ordnance as you can see no target, then I added a waypoint (just general).

This is important especially when you have multiple search and destroy missions along with monitoring of Jump points and such. Reason? You may have to clean it up at some point, trust me.  ;)

Oh, don't be worried, you can remove the waypoints as well, doing that doesn't cancel the target on the salvo screen.

« Last Edit: December 03, 2023, 05:42:49 PM by Froggiest1982 »
 
The following users thanked this post: db48x, BAGrimm

Offline Kamilo

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 92
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3493 on: December 04, 2023, 05:03:20 AM »
I have landed ground forces on an enemy planet and the sensors are active, yet I cannot see how many tons of enemies are left. Why is that?
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3005
  • Thanked: 2259 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #3494 on: December 04, 2023, 09:40:57 AM »
I have landed ground forces on an enemy planet and the sensors are active, yet I cannot see how many tons of enemies are left. Why is that?

What is your sensor resolution? Usually you need a RES-1 sensor to detect ground units in my experience.