[Bug] Fighter Targeting

4xC · 520

4xC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 1013
  • Potential is something NOT to be wasted. (EVER)
on: November 07, 2016, 10:32:08 am
In this instance, I think there is a targeting issue with fighter base modules.

Normally, I see them prioritizing enemy ships, but the whole time, it has been going for missiles and particulate. and even when the enemy ship bridges were in range, I didn't see my fighters hitting them. The image shows their reticles and their displayed range.

Speaking of range, I hope that the ranges of each module can be set to leave dotted lines when inside range of identical modules. ;)

C,C,C,C


planetfall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 1046
  • In radians may we find vectory!
Reply #1 on: November 07, 2016, 11:31:49 am
That isn't an enemy ship.

I am an idiot! Mobile crop! Blargh.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2016, 11:34:41 am by planetfall »

The nap takers are here to... welp.

"Build a ladder to the moon" is simple as a sentence, but actually doing it is not.


Sorrontis

  • Community Guild
  • *****
    • Posts: 2012
  • CW4! CW4! CW4! CW4! CW4!
Reply #2 on: November 07, 2016, 12:27:36 pm
That isn't an enemy ship.

I am an idiot! Mobile crop! Blargh.


Hahahaha!  ::)


But on the "bug" part. yeah, I've noticed that the fighters targeting isn't the most spot on. The only time I get them to fire at the enemy ship bridge is by accident. The reticle is close but not on the CM itself.

"If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion."


Karsten75

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 6823
Reply #3 on: November 07, 2016, 12:33:04 pm
I believe fighters are intended to fight particles, not ships.

The targeting reticule targets a weighted average density of particles within range.

"Any leftover cabbage can and will be mixed with mayo"
   - Cole's Law


knucracker

  • Administrator
  • *****
    • Posts: 11749
Reply #4 on: November 07, 2016, 01:07:03 pm
Yep, they target particles and where they fly depends on a 2d weighted average of particles in range of the carrier.  During development, in the most extreme case, I made them target ships and allowed them to do particle damage directly over a CM on a ship.  That made them insta-kill every ship in range of a carrier in one shot.  So a titan ship could approach a carrier and the fighters would blow it up as soon as they reached it.

So, things of course  got balanced down.  If someone else wants to make an enemy ship terminator custom module, I'll leave that to the community (and hopefully it will be easier once I get custom module support officially in the game).



4xC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 1013
  • Potential is something NOT to be wasted. (EVER)
Reply #5 on: November 07, 2016, 05:05:27 pm
Yep, they target particles and where they fly depends on a 2d weighted average of particles in range of the carrier.  During development, in the most extreme case, I made them target ships and allowed them to do particle damage directly over a CM on a ship.  That made them insta-kill every ship in range of a carrier in one shot.  So a titan ship could approach a carrier and the fighters would blow it up as soon as they reached it.

So, things of course  got balanced down.  If someone else wants to make an enemy ship terminator custom module, I'll leave that to the community (and hopefully it will be easier once I get custom module support officially in the game).

If fighters are, as you described, mobile cannons instead of assassins like they were in development, what good is their "stealth" technology?

Besides, Particle beam modules sap fighters of their energy regardless, rendering them useless against enemy Hammer-themed ships.

And why not allow fighters to at least be able to target ships from nearest hull portion? This way they remain viable against large ships without sniping their bridges. And why not allow this same target priority option for missiles? After all, the analysis sticky thread seems to indicate that missiles are less efficient than cannons in direct fights. Not only do they cost more energy, but they pack far less punch than cannon shots.

I assume CM=bridge, right?

C,C,C,C


planetfall

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 1046
  • In radians may we find vectory!
Reply #6 on: November 07, 2016, 05:42:54 pm
Fighters would seem to be the ideal weapon to use against ships. Having a bigger target would offset their terrible aim...

The nap takers are here to... welp.

"Build a ladder to the moon" is simple as a sentence, but actually doing it is not.


4xC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 1013
  • Potential is something NOT to be wasted. (EVER)
Reply #7 on: November 07, 2016, 06:13:57 pm
Fighters would seem to be the ideal weapon to use against ships. Having a bigger target would offset their terrible aim...

I think "ideal" was meant to be filled by MK7s.

C,C,C,C


Prof

  • Jr. Member
  • **
    • Posts: 54
Reply #8 on: November 07, 2016, 06:50:31 pm
I enjoy the fact that Fighters are the final iteration of the Phalanx, which was changed several times throughout development.