#1. Static single-target selection in a fleet setting.
When a fleet of multiple identically-sized targets of the same class enters range, every mine will fire at the top-most target, overkilling then self-destructing because even with retarget capability, they won't seek out new targets. Assuming the attached image posts, yes it is a 48,000 ton ship with 2x800 tons of escorts, but in a previous incident against 2 of the exact same ship I had the exact same problem where the mines targeted the very first ship exclusively.
Mines and for that matter any missiles that rely on sensors really, really should select targets randomly within whatever rules they work with. There's no fluff reason why all mines or missiles go after the exact same target when there are multiple identical ones on their sensors, it's purely a game mechanical issue where the "top" target is selected instead of randomly selecting from all "identical" targets.
I'd love to see a weighted random targeting chance (e.g., 67% chance of targeting the size-200 contact, 33% chance of targeting the size-100 contact), but I'd settle for simply splitting the fire between identical targets.
Missiles currently select the nearest target, but they are probably also targeting the oldest contact if more than one target is at the same distance.
Randomizing is no problem, but how should salvo target detection handle distance and size? Should it be closest targets weighted by size, or any target within range weighted by size, or maybe targets weighted by size and range?
Bear in mind that too much dispersion will make the missiles less effective, especially against shielded targets.
I would make the minimal change: missiles target by the same rules they do now (i.e., largest and closest signature of the given type), they simply will choose randomly from a list of targets that are identical under this criteria. This way, missiles with target acquisition sensors function almost exactly as they do now, but are not artificially nerfed by an arbitrary bookkeeping mechanic (which ship is "on top" in memory).
That would work for me as well. Experienced this recently - I placed a significant number of captor mines in a pattern around a JP. some of them should have taken more than 5s to reach a target as it appeared. I designed the mines with ASMs that had active sensors and could reacquire another target after the first one was killed. Still lost them all in a single 5s pulse to kill one 35k warship as 136 enemy ships transitted through the JP
If there was an option for Steve to spend more time on coding the mechanic, I would suggest the option to set a lower limit on target active sensor size so that smaller ships could be ignored (this might add some interesting options for using cloaking tech to reduce active sensor hull size). I would also use this infinite coding capacity (TM) to create a Minefield Controller Module that could be added to warships/bases to enable them to remotely trigger clusters of mines, but keep the random selection of targets. I think it would be too much of balance breaker to allow this notional controller module to nominate targets for mines. I know this suggestion is similar to a Starfire 3rd Ed technology option, but it does seem that in a world of trans-newtonian mechanics there would be sufficiently advanced autonomous (or otherwise) targetting systems to allow mines to be at least partially controlled.
Just my 2p for what it's worth
Welchbloke
Recent Posts
