by Seraph » Mon 9. Mar 2015, 01:04
I know I'm new and all, but I thought I'd throw my 0.02cr into the mix here.
Missiles:
Ship to Ship missiles should probably be moving so fast (advanced propellants) that only the longest-range shots would have time to animate a missile flying at all. Consider that the current SRAAM Sidewinder missile flies at Mach 2.7; that's short-range. Long range missiles tend more towards Mach 4+. I suppose it really all depends on the scale of distance in space battles, which is admittedly difficult to discern - a destroyer and a fighter occupy 1 tile each, regardless of the implied massive size difference. How 'far' is 1 tile in space combat, then?
That said, I like the idea of other things interacting with/stopping missiles. I'm not entirely sure you need to draw flying missiles for that though - couldn't it be handled by invisible detection of obstacles, gunner skill, luck, etc? Without seeing it, though, it just feels like the game is cheating you out of shots. It's hard to deny a player the results of their actions without incurring bad feels. It's a sticky wicket, to be sure.
Current enemies:
Absolutely are too statistically advantaged. (I still wouldn't say pirate fighters are powerful.) Only top-end spoileriffic threats and unique, named targets should be that borked - everything else should work within an approximation of the restrictions the player is under; an non-unique enemy destroyer should never be able to do something a player destroyer couldn't.
Firing arcs:
A thematically good idea that would be annoying in practice for the players. Nobody likes not being able to shoot their weapons at things; it feels terrible, like you wasted money/effort on the weapon that isn't useful in this moment.
Also, there is an assumption in most roguelikes (including this one, a lot of the time) that there is no 'active' facing - your character/ship essentially faces every open direction as they need to. The presence of shield arcs in space means that there is some element of facing in this game already, but making it more complex will require more inputs. Like adjustment jets to change facing without moving, or the ability to cut all thrust and drift on inertia (the better to keep you in my forward launcher arcs, my dear). And more inputs does not always equal better gameplay - sometimes it just equals more tedium and confusion for your players.
APS:
-Flares are not terribly useful in space, because they would not overwhelm a ship's engine heat signature. A flare that could is a gigantic waste of technological development and I can't see many civilizations doing so. They'd stick with the more useful options below, and develop them into a better form.
-Chaff is somewhat useful, but you'd have to release a cloud of (present-day, conventional) chaff somewhere near the size of an asteroid to distract missiles from the radar signature of a big-ass spaceship. (A drone, emitting a cloned radar pulse, would be better suited for this - and MUCH more awesome!) It's also possible that advanced science = advanced radar-emitting materials...but I doubt it.
-Point-defense Weapons (anti-missiles, anti-fighter guns) are the big winner here, being not just practical but REALLY TROPEY for space vehicles. The idea of devoting a weapon slot to a PDW, which would then make Gunner rolls to take out drones and missiles as they come, is extremely interesting.
Anyway, those are my thoughts, take them with a grain (or mountain) of salt. Hopefully something helpful was in there somewhere.
