New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot (aka Arc Disruptor)

Creation, discussion, and balancing of game content such as techs, buildings, ship parts.

Moderators: Oberlus, Committer, Oberlus, Committer

Message
Author
User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#31 Post by labgnome » Tue Jan 14, 2020 10:05 am

The Silent One wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 6:47 am
If these new weapons go into the game, they should receive their own original art assets, not some recoloration of existing ones.
We're re-coloring existing unused art assets, so I'm personally fine with it. However if you want to create unique art assets for these weapons, or missile weapons for that matter, please don't let us stop you.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
The Silent One
Graphics
Posts: 1045
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:27 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#32 Post by The Silent One » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:42 pm

labgnome wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 10:05 am
We're re-coloring existing unused art assets, so I'm personally fine with it.
Are you? No, you're not. This totally is a recoloration of the plasma cannon: https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... asma-1.png
labgnome wrote:However if you want to create unique art assets for these weapons, or missile weapons for that matter, please don't let us stop you.
Instead of taking a snide tone with me, I recommend that you check more carefully what you contribute.
If I provided any images, code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0.

User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#33 Post by labgnome » Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:09 pm

The Silent One wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:42 pm
labgnome wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 10:05 am
We're re-coloring existing unused art assets, so I'm personally fine with it.
Are you? No, you're not. This totally is a recoloration of the plasma cannon: https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... asma-1.png
The Ion Cannon is a recolor of the plasma cannon. I just matched the colors on the numbered plasma cannon images, rather than cutting, pasting and re-positioning the numbers one by one. It was simply the quicker way to accomplish adding numbers for the weapon tiers. Recolors as new art is nothing new to Free Orion, the (new) interstellar lighthouse is mostly a recolor of the scanning facility (the old lighthouse). If necessary I can try to make other changes to the image, maybe adding extra parts to the gun, like with the death ray, but I cannot guarantee the quality. I'm simply trying to do the best with the skills I have.
labgnome wrote:However if you want to create unique art assets for these weapons, or missile weapons for that matter, please don't let us stop you.
Instead of taking a snide tone with me, I recommend that you check more carefully what you contribute.
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my intentions. I as not trying to be snide with you. I do not think that this hostility form you is well-placed. I am fully aware of my limited skills, and don't need a reminder. I was trying to give a sincere offer for you to step in if that is what you want to do. You have much better digital art skills than I do.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#34 Post by Oberlus » Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:39 pm

We can wait until we figure out what we want and what will be the fluff before requiring TSO's skills.

User avatar
The Silent One
Graphics
Posts: 1045
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:27 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#35 Post by The Silent One » Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:44 am

labgnome wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:09 pm
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my intentions. I as not trying to be snide with you. I do not think that this hostility form you is well-placed. ... I was trying to give a sincere offer for you to step in if that is what you want to do.
If that's so, let's put it aside. I do very much welcome art contributions from you, even if they may not be perfect, my first art contributions for FO weren't much to look at for sure, and my contributions are far from perfect, too. However, please try to create something original rather than recoloring or piecing together, and if you create something, put devotion into it. Being the only active graphics team member I feel responsible for maintaining the quality standards of the game until someone suitable for the graphic lead position joins us. This is a new weapon type, so like the mass driver looks different from the laser, the pulse laser / ion cannon should have a distinctive graphic which gives an idea about what it does.
If I provided any images, code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0.

User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#36 Post by labgnome » Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:52 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:39 pm
We can wait until we figure out what we want and what will be the fluff before requiring TSO's skills.
I think that's fine.

I think that maybe we should think about the upcoming technology themes and weather or not we want multi-shot weapons to be together in one theme and spread between the different themes (and possibly consider them implications of missile weapons and technologies in this balance). For myself I was thinking that flack cannons could go into the mechanical theme, pulse lasers into the crystal theme and ion cannons in the energy theme. However I could also see the multi-shot weapons all or mostly falling into one theme or another.
The Silent One wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:44 am
labgnome wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:09 pm
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my intentions. I as not trying to be snide with you. I do not think that this hostility form you is well-placed. ... I was trying to give a sincere offer for you to step in if that is what you want to do.
If that's so, let's put it aside. I do very much welcome art contributions from you, even if they may not be perfect, my first art contributions for FO weren't much to look at for sure, and my contributions are far from perfect, too. However, please try to create something original rather than recoloring or piecing together, and if you create something, put devotion into it. Being the only active graphics team member I feel responsible for maintaining the quality standards of the game until someone suitable for the graphic lead position joins us. This is a new weapon type, so like the mass driver looks different from the laser, the pulse laser / ion cannon should have a distinctive graphic which gives an idea about what it does.
I mean my skills are pretty-much limited to re-working existing pieces with GIMP. Creating something completely original digitally is outside my skill set. But please don't think that I don't put effort and energy into what I do. I wouldn't want to subject the Free Orion community to whatever crude completely original work I might try to create. I want to uphold the same aesthetic standard that this game has.

My logic was that since we have the unused assets of the pulse laser and the ion cannon, why not put them to use for this new weapon idea? It seemed like a good solution to me. I've always liked especially the pulse laser in concept and wanted to put the asset to use. Part of me feels bad at the idea of these un-utilized that someone had way back in the development of Free Orion ideas languishing away in the ship parts folder forever unused. The Ion cannon is much less distinctive than the pulse laser, and so maybe I should have stopped there, but I got myself excited for the possibility of being involved in implementing this new weapon system.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#37 Post by Vezzra » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:13 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 12:37 am
labgnome wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:43 pm
Maybe have Multishot A be the Pulse Laser, and Multishot B be the Ion Cannon?
Pulse Laser sounds like it should have Laser 1 as prerequisite, and it would be great if it doesn't, to get an independent tech branch (steming from Aggression, I guess). I've thought of some evolution of the mass driver, like some kind of debris shotgun or railgun.
The B version would make sense to be energy based, so Ion Cannon doesn't sound bad.
If you're going to name the new weapon "pulse laser", I'd suggest to rename the current laser to "beam laser". That way the "pulse laser" does not sound like a derivated/specialised version of the "common laser", and would not sound like the "pulse laser" should have Laser 1 as prerequisite.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1467
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#38 Post by Ophiuchus » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:34 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:25 am
Let's make two weapon parts, each with tech upgrades, one equivalent in cost and efficiency to laser (good for comsats and small chaff, acceptable as flak, bad vs early shields, innefective vs late shields) and one in between of plasma and death ray (good against any form of chaff and small hulls, acceptable vs early shields, bad vs late shields and as flak):

(All three shot)

Multishot A: 30 PPs, base dmg 2, +1 per tech upgrade and pilots level up to 8.
Multishot B: 50 PPs, base dmg 5, +2 per tech upgrade and pilots level up to 17.
I agree a second multishot weapon makes sense. I still do not see my concerns addressed regarding pilots.

So multishot A first. Weapon is mostly like 3 three MD3 in one for half the price. Do you assume base hull structure 2 or 3?
You aim for a laser level weapon but Multishot-A upgrades damage per pilot like a plasma weapon.

Compared to my 3-shot Gamma Burst proposal: You suggest much higher research cost and turns (40+30+45+75 vs 12+10+50 RP), but 25% cheaper build cost (30 vs 40PP) and starting at a lower damage (2 vs 3). Max stats without pilots are the same.

With great pilot Multishot-A-1 one gets 12 (3x4) damage for 40 RP (3 against shield-3). For Lasers-1 great pilots get 9 damage for 60RP (6 against shield-3).
With great pilot Multishot-A-4 one gets 21 (3x7) damage for 190 RP (12 against shield-3). For Lasers-4 great pilots get 15 damage for 260RP (12 against shield-3).

Multishot B does heavily rely on pilot level (6 damage extra per level). At that time you probably will have good pilots and your enemy probably not have ultimate so probably there wont be whopping 12 damage difference.

If you only have average pilots you will not use Multishot-B (?).

I did not intend the anti-chaff weapon to be pilot-skill niche. I also think Multishot-A for downing comsats is accessible enough with that high RP cost.

If we want to use pilot skill I think I would rather go for setting base hull to two damage, make the weapon damage-2 and have the number of shots increased, maybe have this automatically available like the flak cannon - lets call it Mine-thrower or something. Could be targeting ships only, not planets. Probably target fighters as well. The main use would be to bring down early game comsats preferably in the first combat bout. Fighters appear starting from bout two, so that is kind of complementory.

We could also add Multishot-A and Multishot-B as alternative weapons research path to the classical one (in that case targeting both ships and planets), only really worthwhile if you have (or plan to get) great pilots or not going against shields.
So chaff-killing would be a secondary property of the multishot line, so it would not be the main purpose and main design point.

Classic line has a base damage, has up to 3 extra damage levels from tech upgrades and 3 levels from pilot skill.
One extra level gives +33%/+40%/+33%/+44% compared to the base damage.
Vezzra wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:13 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 12:37 am
labgnome wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:43 pm
Maybe have Multishot A be the Pulse Laser, and Multishot B be the Ion Cannon?
Pulse Laser sounds like it should have Laser 1 as prerequisite, and it would be great if it doesn't, to get an independent tech branch (steming from Aggression, I guess). I've thought of some evolution of the mass driver, like some kind of debris shotgun or railgun.
The B version would make sense to be energy based, so Ion Cannon doesn't sound bad.
If you're going to name the new weapon "pulse laser", I'd suggest to rename the current laser to "beam laser". That way the "pulse laser" does not sound like a derivated/specialised version of the "common laser", and would not sound like the "pulse laser" should have Laser 1 as prerequisite.
That is a good idea I think. If multishot-A is roughly comparable in power level to lasers it would give a hint the user to estimate the power level.
Else it would be probably better if it does not have laser in the name at all.

On another note the gamma burst slingshot fluff is a short-range laser system (which would be easier focus-wise to develop do than our beam lasers) sent into range using a thrower or rocket/missile system. So fluff-wise that would not need beam laser as a prerequisite.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1467
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#39 Post by Ophiuchus » Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:09 pm

labgnome wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:51 pm
Here are the new pulsed laser in blues.
...
while I was at it I value inverted the beam on the death ray so it looks different. Let me know what you think.
death-ray.png
Blue pulse laser looks good and beam and colors are well distinguishable from the other weapons i think. Weapon parts all look similar though. Ion-cannon and plasma gun are the same. Pulse laser and beam laser are the same.

First time i saw the inverted death-ray in game i thought no way, but loading up a second time the idea seems to be good. Definitly would need some work though to look good, so i do not think this is really necessary.

Now some ideas if I could simply wish for graphics.

For the fixed-3-shot multishots it would be good to have showing that in the weapon part icon. E.g. having three nozzles and/or a three parted beam (e.g. three overlapping pulses for the pulse laser).

For a mine-thrower starting at 3-shots i would imagine something reminding of a spiky WW2 mine as icon and as a beam graphic having three main explosion blobs and a number of smaller ones (for the possible upgrades).
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#40 Post by Oberlus » Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:53 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:34 pm
I still do not see my concerns addressed regarding pilots.

So multishot A first. Weapon is mostly like 3 three MD3 in one for half the price. Do you assume base hull structure 2 or 3?
You aim for a laser level weapon but Multishot-A upgrades damage per pilot like a plasma weapon.

Compared to my 3-shot Gamma Burst proposal: You suggest much higher research cost and turns (40+30+45+75 vs 12+10+50 RP), but 25% cheaper build cost (30 vs 40PP) and starting at a lower damage (2 vs 3). Max stats without pilots are the same.

The problem I see with the original proposal is that the niche is very constrained, specially in time (suboptimal late game).

Comparing Gamma Burst Slingshot (as per original suggestion), Fighters/Bombers (1 hangar+ 1launch bay), and the multishot A and B:

PP costs
- GBS: 40
- Fighters: 40
- Bombers: 45
- MSA: 30 (maybe 40)
- MSB: 50 (maybe 60)

Facing shielded (GBS) or flak-defended (fighters) ships (same tech level for shield):
Bout GBS Fighter Bombers MSA (Sh3) MSB (Sh5)
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 2*3 2*5 0 0
3 0 1*3 0 0 0
Total 0 3*3 2*5 0 0

Three refinements (also for CBS although the OP only mentions two)

Facing undefended ships
Bout GBS Fighter Bombers MSA MSB
1 3*6 0 0 3*5 3*11
2 3*6 2*13 2*19 3*5 3*11
3 3*6 3*13 2*19 3*5 3*11
Total 9*6 5*13 4*19 9*5 9*11

Facing shielded (GBS) or flak-defended (fighters) ships (same tech level for shield):
Bout GBS Fighter Bombers MSA (Sh3) MSB (Sh9)
1 0 0 0 3*2 3*2
2 0 2*13 2*19 3*2 3*2
3 0 1*13 0 3*2 3*2
Total 0 3*13 2*19 9*2 9*2

Six Refinements (3 techs+ultimate pilots)

Facing undefended ships
Bout Fighter Bombers MSA MSB
1 0 0 3*8 3*17
2 2*13 2*19 3*8 3*17
3 3*13 2*19 3*8 3*17
Total 5*13 4*19 9*8 9*17


Facing shielded (GBS) or flak-defended (fighters) ships (same tech level for shield):
Bout Fighter Bombers MSA (Sh5) MSB (Sh15)
1 0 0 3*3 3*2
2 2*13 2*19 3*3 3*2
3 1*13 0 3*3 3*2
Total 3*13 2*19 9*3 3*2


As a pilot-independent weapon, bombers and fighters are comparable to the GBS against undefended ships but better against defended ones. And this is worse late game: fighters are a viable strategy for both killing fleets of shielded and unshielded ships, and comparable to GBS at killing comsats (fighters can kill 3 per turn, total 6, GBS only 1.5 per turn, total 4.5). In multiplayer games recently, with the latest base hull change, fleets focused on bombers were great at taking down comsats (not shooting on bout 1 wasn't a problem since the comsats were not soaking much damage on bout 1). So I think the GBS with this specs would have little use in-game, more so if you consider that you don't see big chunks of comsats early game (when this weapons is competitive).

So I thought the multishot weapon would be better if it could scale until late game. Could not make it work for a cheap weapon that spans from early to late game (either useless or too powerful at some point of game). The same with an expensive one, like the first suggestion I made in this thread, found some objections that I don't share but I'm unable to contest. So I tried to do something similar with two multishot weapons, A and B, both pilot-dependent and capable of compete with bombers.

If you allow the GBS to make use of pilots trait and add a fourth tech (third refinement) for it you get more or less my multishot-A suggestion, with one less damage per shot at start to make it comparable to laser: better versus unshielded (much better versus unshield small), much worse versus shielded. Hence the 30 PP cost, same as laser, and RP costs 50% greater than those of laser to compensate for the extra damage it can do when not countered. It is well suited (cost effective) against very small unshielded ships late game (not only comsats, any other small hull without late game armour), and with it's smaller cost compared to bombers/figthers it's still competitive late game against comsats.

The B version (tier 4, comparable in cost and damage to a death ray) is intended for not so small or only slightly shielded ships. It is not as cost-effective as MSA against comsats but it is way better at shooting down bigger ships, and to be fully countered the enemy must invest on expensive top-tier shields, so it is competetive end game.

For the fluff, I see MSA as a form of massive, fast mass driver. Something like a doped space shotgun or massive railgun, that shoots a swarm of projectiles to an area hoping to hit several targets, but with each shot being small and easily rejected with shields. The refinements make the shot stronger and the ammo heavier.
The MSB could be unlocked by the MSA and the Neutronium Something, and be a gravitational (instead of magnetic) railgun that shoots small balls of concentrated mass (alike to Futurama's Nibbler's little feces). It could be required, or not, to have an internal slot for the weapons to work, something like a Mass Quark Concentrator (or something fancier by less gliberish), which could be helpful for balancing. The masses used as bullets, being non-metallic, non-magnetic and immensely dense, are able to penetrate the less advanced shields.

Ophiuchus wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:34 pm
If we want to use pilot skill I think I would rather go for setting base hull to two damage, make the weapon damage-2 and have the number of shots increased, maybe have this automatically available like the flak cannon - lets call it Mine-thrower or something. Could be targeting ships only, not planets. Probably target fighters as well. The main use would be to bring down early game comsats preferably in the first combat bout. Fighters appear starting from bout two, so that is kind of complementory.
So pilots increase fire rate (like flak) and techs increase damage? Sounds like refinements for the flak
Or you mean the other way around? Pilots increase damage and techs increase fire rate?
Starting at fire rate 3, you get a 3(early)/6(late) shot weapon of damage 1(bad pilot)-5(ultimate pilot). Base tech, avg. pilots: 3*2 (like 2MD1, or 1Laser1+20%); maxed out with Fulver/Etty: 6*3 (like 1Plasma4 but usless against any shield); with Misiorla: 6*5 (like 1DR4 but usless against shield 5 or better, and 40% against shield 3).
This weapon would be specially good against small, unshielded ships (and more so when you get the upgrades) and figthers, and utterly useless against shielded ships. I think it predates the flak cannon except in very seldom circumstances (like facing a fleet made only of shielded-carriers if you have Eaxaw/Mu Ursh/Misiorla). In that case, this could be a rework of the flak cannon.

User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#41 Post by labgnome » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:49 am

Vezzra wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:13 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 12:37 am
labgnome wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:43 pm
Maybe have Multishot A be the Pulse Laser, and Multishot B be the Ion Cannon?
Pulse Laser sounds like it should have Laser 1 as prerequisite, and it would be great if it doesn't, to get an independent tech branch (steming from Aggression, I guess). I've thought of some evolution of the mass driver, like some kind of debris shotgun or railgun.
The B version would make sense to be energy based, so Ion Cannon doesn't sound bad.
If you're going to name the new weapon "pulse laser", I'd suggest to rename the current laser to "beam laser". That way the "pulse laser" does not sound like a derivated/specialised version of the "common laser", and would not sound like the "pulse laser" should have Laser 1 as prerequisite.
I like the "beam laser" and "pulse laser" ideas myself. Especially for a damage comparable to lasers weapon.
Ophiuchus wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:09 pm
Blue pulse laser looks good and beam and colors are well distinguishable from the other weapons i think. Weapon parts all look similar though. Ion-cannon and plasma gun are the same. Pulse laser and beam laser are the same.
Yeah it's not perfect but I'm glad you like it.
First time i saw the inverted death-ray in game i thought no way, but loading up a second time the idea seems to be good. Definitly would need some work though to look good, so i do not think this is really necessary.
Okay it was just a thought to make it more distinct. I'm glad you liked it though. The idea is also part of my agenda to have death rays moved into the "void" technology theme.
Oberlus wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:53 pm
For the fluff, I see MSA as a form of massive, fast mass driver. Something like a doped space shotgun or massive railgun, that shoots a swarm of projectiles to an area hoping to hit several targets, but with each shot being small and easily rejected with shields. The refinements make the shot stronger and the ammo heavier.
The MSB could be unlocked by the MSA and the Neutronium Something, and be a gravitational (instead of magnetic) railgun that shoots small balls of concentrated mass (alike to Futurama's Nibbler's little feces). It could be required, or not, to have an internal slot for the weapons to work, something like a Mass Quark Concentrator (or something fancier by less gliberish), which could be helpful for balancing. The masses used as bullets, being non-metallic, non-magnetic and immensely dense, are able to penetrate the less advanced shields.
While I'm still in favor of MSA being a pulsed laser, rather than a rail gun, some of the ideas you've presented intrigue me. I just think that having two "laser" weapons that do comparable damage, one single shot one multi-shot makes sense to me and would be easy to intuit.

The idea of a neutronium slug thrower intrigues me. Especially since you could make it strategic resource dependent (or at lest as much so as anything in Free Orion), having it dependent on the neutronium forge and thus supply connection to a neutron star with a neutronium extractor. My main concern in tying it to neutonium tech is that it would be coming too late in the game. It's one of the last techs in the tech tree currently. Maybe it could be a super-powerful "Multi-Shot C" weapon that takes-up the core slot?

I still like the idea of MSB being an "ion cannon", as that places it conceptually close to the plasma cannon. However this brings me to the next intriguing idea, the "mass quark concentrator" internal part. Maybe you could have a "quark-plasma cannon", that used the "quark concentrator" part to generate balls of quark-gluon plasma to lob at enemy ships?

Otherwise if we want to keep the multi-shot weapons in the same theme, I could see MSB as a phased-array laser, maybe requiring both pulse lasers and beam lasers.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#42 Post by Oberlus » Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:50 pm

I very much prefer to have a new weapon tech branch, so that you can actually choose to skip (at least for a while) laser.

A pulsed laser and a continuous laser must require the same technologies. If you use that fluff, you either unlock one with the other or unlock both at the same time.

As per above, I prefer something ballistic instead of beam-based to be able to detach the fluff from the main weapon tech tree.

User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#43 Post by labgnome » Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:19 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:50 pm
A pulsed laser and a continuous laser must require the same technologies. If you use that fluff, you either unlock one with the other or unlock both at the same time.
They don't need to require the same technologies. There is no reason you can't have pulse laser and beam leaser be separate technologies. They would just belong in the same theme together. You might even want them at the same tier, but there is no reason they would both have to be unlocked by the single same technology. You could always pick one and skip the other.
As per above, I prefer something ballistic instead of beam-based to be able to detach the fluff from the main weapon tech tree.
But the main weapon tree probably isn't going to survive the creation of the technology themes, and this seems short sighted to me. Ballistic weapons fit into the mechanical theme, but that's also where missiles should go IMO, and I think it would be really poor balance to have both missiles and multi-shot weapons both concentrated into the same theme. Now while we haven't decided for sure to put missiles into the game yet, not planning for them could greatly imbalance the technology themes, and planning for them and them not going in only means that crystal or energy gets multi-shot weapons.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#44 Post by Oberlus » Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:35 pm

labgnome wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:19 pm
Oberlus wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:50 pm
A pulsed laser and a continuous laser must require the same technologies. If you use that fluff, you either unlock one with the other or unlock both at the same time.
They don't need to require the same technologies. There is no reason you can't have pulse laser and beam leaser be separate technologies. They would just belong in the same theme together. You might even want them at the same tier, but there is no reason they would both have to be unlocked by the single same technology. You could always pick one and skip the other.
There is no need to put two laser techs in the same branch of the tech tree, true, but it would make sense.
On the other hand, there is no need to use laser fluff for the MSA/MSB weapons, and it does make more sense to use ballistic fluff if we put them on a branch aside from the laser.

This is an sterile discussion and I will refrain from continuing it. You may open a poll if you like.
labgnome wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:19 pm
But the main weapon tree probably isn't going to survive the creation of the technology themes, and this seems short sighted to me. Ballistic weapons fit into the mechanical theme, but that's also where missiles should go IMO, and I think it would be really poor balance to have both missiles and multi-shot weapons both concentrated into the same theme. Now while we haven't decided for sure to put missiles into the game yet, not planning for them could greatly imbalance the technology themes, and planning for them and them not going in only means that crystal or energy gets multi-shot weapons.
These MSA/MSB weapons are not for the NTT. The NTT will take a lot of time to be implemented, and I assume Ophiuchus is thinking on adding this in the short time (which I like), fitting with the current weapon system and not the stuff drafted for the NTT.
As you already know (since you've participated in the threads where all the stuff about the themes and the weapons for it), I already have a rather clear idea of what would be the weapon system. It has pulsed laser, railguns, coilguns, missiles, torpedoes, tentacles, spines, assault troops, etc. If you intend to do an alternative proposal, you have my green light.

User avatar
labgnome
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: New weapon part - Gamma Burst Slingshot

#45 Post by labgnome » Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:51 am

Oberlus wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:35 pm
These MSA/MSB weapons are not for the NTT. The NTT will take a lot of time to be implemented, and I assume Ophiuchus is thinking on adding this in the short time (which I like), fitting with the current weapon system and not the stuff drafted for the NTT.
As you already know (since you've participated in the threads where all the stuff about the themes and the weapons for it), I already have a rather clear idea of what would be the weapon system. It has pulsed laser, railguns, coilguns, missiles, torpedoes, tentacles, spines, assault troops, etc. If you intend to do an alternative proposal, you have my green light.
I don't want to step on any toes, but if I have your green light I'll give you a taste of what I am thinking. If missiles and MSA and MSB go through this gives us five families of weapons. Single-shot direct weapons, multi-shot direct weapons, missiles, fighters/drones and the "monster parts". You could have each theme specialize in one type of weapon. I'll make a proper thread about it later tonight.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

Post Reply