The max range on certain weapons need to be changed

:unsure: One change I want to see to the space combat for the Odyssey update is actually to add a bit more realism to certain types of weapons. If the weapon is supposed to be a ranged one, like those heat seeking missiles, then they should behave like they would in real life. I should be able to target someone 30-40 nautical miles away if real life weapons like the AIM-120 are any indication. These types of changes would make the combat a bit more interesting, because right now it just plays more like your typical Star Warsish space shooter with the WW2 style dog fights. Its gotten old and played out to be quite frank. We've seen it in just about every space shooter before at this point. The planes already have counter measures, point defense systems and jamming equipment, so giving certain weapons more range like they should have won't break the gameplay. The game is already ready made for it. 👍👍
 
I want to add that projectile weapons (cannons, multi-cannons, missiles, etc) shouldn't be affected by what speed the firing ship is moving at.
For example, if the top speed of a projectile is 1000m/sec and you're traveling at 500m/sec when you fire, the projectile should reach a speed of 1500m/sec.
 
These limits are most likely imposed for balance as well as instance size limitations. Yeah, missiles should have a much greater range, and their speed should be relative, but then again, so should the ships speed. Ships and missiles should keep accelerating while under thrust, not max out at some arbitrary speed. How fast it accelerates/decelerates should be decided by mass and thrust but it is not. They needed a certain level of arcadiness to facilitate combat and to differentiate ships.
 
These limits are most likely imposed for balance as well as instance size limitations. Yeah, missiles should have a much greater range, and their speed should be relative, but then again, so should the ships speed. Ships and missiles should keep accelerating while under thrust, not max out at some arbitrary speed. How fast it accelerates/decelerates should be decided by mass and thrust but it is not. They needed a certain level of arcadiness to facilitate combat and to differentiate ships.

Well, I'm not suggesting too much realism, just a simple increase of some weapons max range to make the combat interesting. As it stands now, its just bland & uninspired to me, seen it a thousand times already. Its one of the reasons why some people consider the game to be boring half the time. I wouldn't even be that concerned about balancing either. If people are concerned about "balance", then equip your ship with point defense systems and counter measures. In a game like this, balancing the combat would be the last thing in the world I'd care about as the developer. You will either be at a disadvantage in some way, or you won't. It should be left entirely up to the player to address it, instead of artificially handicapping the gameplay for the sake of parity.
 
:unsure: One change I want to see to the space combat for the Odyssey update is actually to add a bit more realism to certain types of weapons. If the weapon is supposed to be a ranged one, like those heat seeking missiles, then they should behave like they would in real life. I should be able to target someone 30-40 nautical miles away if real life weapons like the AIM-120 are any indication. These types of changes would make the combat a bit more interesting, because right now it just plays more like your typical Star Warsish space shooter with the WW2 style dog fights. Its gotten old and played out to be quite frank. We've seen it in just about every space shooter before at this point. The planes already have counter measures, point defense systems and jamming equipment, so giving certain weapons more range like they should have won't break the gameplay. The game is already ready made for it. 👍👍

I don't get it.
Missiles in ED are useful VS unshielded targets.
Even if our "targeting system" would be able to get a lock on something say 40 nm away, (but we are limited to just few kilometers....the wonders of future space tech! ), what would be the point in firing missiles to a far away shielded target?
 
I don't get it.
Missiles in ED are useful VS unshielded targets.
Even if our "targeting system" would be able to get a lock on something say 40 nm away, (but we are limited to just few kilometers....the wonders of future space tech! ), what would be the point in firing missiles to a far away shielded target?

🤷‍♂️ Some ships just might not have shields. And in the event that one of them super cruises out of range of short range weapons in an escape attempt with his shields still recharging, that's where my missiles would come in. And this is where some degree of realism would come in as well, or common sense. It doesn't make sense for his shields to block incoming fire, yet he can somehow shoot at me without hitting his own shields. So this is another thing I would change as well. If he wants to be able to shoot at me, he'll have to lower his own shields beforehand. This simple tweak to the gameplay shouldn't be too difficult to do for the devs looking at the way the user interface is already laid out.
 
Seekers lock range is really the only gripe you have with them?...

My gripe is with the whole combat system, not just one weapon. It honestly just looks tacked on with very little thought put into it. You can take the combat from a multiple of other space games and paste it in Elite Dangerous and it will look almost exactly the same.
 
The lore for that is that your ship will disintegrate if it flies too fast. Frame can't take it.

That sounds very plausible actually....sort of. What exactly do you mean by "too fast"? I reckon the frame can take a hell of a pounding given speeds it moves at during a hyperspace jump.
 
This is the worst idea for the effect you say you want to see OP. Long range combat is the lowest skill requirement worst tanking reverski garbage gameplay.

It seems like you want to sit there in a new a-rate conda and spank all-comers without moving. Seeker Missiles are not the answer. Learning how to fly the ship, and engineering it to mitigate it's weaknesses is . Glhf.
 
There are some limitations. Accuracy of shot being one. Hitting someone more than a few km away is very tricky when they are only a pixel wide on your screen.

Lasers in theory go on forever, but of course they don't as they lose coherence over distance.

Talking about realisim, outside of guided missiles, most ammo wouldn't hit a target at more than a few km based on our ships and their weapons excert through sheer luck.
 
The lore for that is that your ship will disintegrate if it flies too fast. Frame can't take it.
That sounds very plausible actually....sort of. What exactly do you mean by "too fast"? I reckon the frame can take a hell of a pounding given speeds it moves at during a hyperspace jump.
How can speed affect hull stress in space ? Acceleration does.
 
The WW II/star wars dog fighting style that you say is getting old is exactly the style the devs wanted in direct opposition of the long range, modern warfare, never-see-what-you're-fighting style you say you want.

Agreed that it's not particularly realistic as it is. I'm sure in 3306 that they'll have created weapons that'll blitz the left eye of a gnat at 5 million miles whilst smoking a kipper (for breakfast) or, actually more likely, nukes that deter all forms of aggression for fear of mutual destruction over being offended...

But thankfully, my preference is lined up perfectly with the devs on this one. Combat (the actual bit we do and not necessarily the meta behind it) is one of the most complete and fully rounded elements of the game and has been since beta. I'm afraid the ship's literally sailed on this one.
 
The other issue is that microgimballing would make fixed hitscan weapons easy to use at such extreme ranges. You would get pelted with rails, the occasional torpedo, beam lasers... a bit dull really Plus, you'd miss cues re SCBs making for a dull real time Battleships encounter.
 
Back
Top Bottom