Taldrenites > Starfleet Command Enhancements and Materials
SFC3 Primary Weapons Data
NannerSlug:
your fine DM.. i think your fine.. like i said.. until i read somthing from taldren, i think you are thinking right.
Cmdr. Krotz:
Quote:
The hit percentages are all the same. The only modifiers I'm aware of are AV, EM, target size, computer, and officer rating. I was under the impression that going to warp simply increased speed, therefore angular velocity.
Are some weapons specifically coded NOT to work against warping ships (like the tractor beam)??
--- End quote ---
The thing isn't that hit percentages are different, but rather the different "physics" between weapons...weapons in SFC3 fall into two distinct categories (throwing out mines of any kind): instantaneous weapons (beams), and direct-fire (torps)...beams travel instantaneously to the target, including those at warp, and get their normal chance at hitting in such situations; direct-fire weapons, which cover torpedoes and bolt-firing primaries, are basically really fast seeking weapons, with a limited ability to adjust course to intercept the target in question...at the point of intercept, the process of determining whether the target is hit is done by the normal to-hit calculations. The thing about direct-fire weapons and warping targets is that warping targets move quickly enough that direct-fire weapons cannot adjust their course enough to ever intercept them went fired at an angle oblique to the targets course, so with the target never intercepted, their is no to-hit calculation...this is fine and good with torps, from some previous posts, it was always intended, but because klink dizzies and pulse phasers use the same "physics" as torps, they kinda get screwed, IMHO anyway.
I can understand your skepticism, but I've flown both sides of the fence, and tested this quite a bit...because seeing is believing, I would suggest looking at the replay I mentioned in my previous post, it's less than 1 MB, and is quite illuminating, I think...
Aldaron:
Quote:
Quote:
The hit percentages are all the same. The only modifiers I'm aware of are AV, EM, target size, computer, and officer rating. I was under the impression that going to warp simply increased speed, therefore angular velocity.
Are some weapons specifically coded NOT to work against warping ships (like the tractor beam)??
--- End quote ---
The thing isn't that hit percentages are different, but rather the different "physics" between weapons...weapons in SFC3 fall into two distinct categories (throwing out mines of any kind): instantaneous weapons (beams), and direct-fire (torps)...beams travel instantaneously to the target, including those at warp, and get their normal chance at hitting in such situations; direct-fire weapons, which cover torpedoes and bolt-firing primaries, are basically really fast seeking weapons, with a limited ability to adjust course to intercept the target in question...at the point of intercept, the process of determining whether the target is hit is done by the normal to-hit calculations. The thing about direct-fire weapons and warping targets is that warping targets move quickly enough that direct-fire weapons cannot adjust their course enough to ever intercept them went fired at an angle oblique to the targets course, so with the target never intercepted, their is no to-hit calculation...this is fine and good with torps, from some previous posts, it was always intended, but because klink dizzies and pulse phasers use the same "physics" as torps, they kinda get screwed, IMHO anyway.
I can understand your skepticism, but I've flown both sides of the fence, and tested this quite a bit...because seeing is believing, I would suggest looking at the replay I mentioned in my previous post, it's less than 1 MB, and is quite illuminating, I think...
--- End quote ---
Totally incorrect. To hit determination is made at the time of firing( ie when the z key is pressed). The "seeking" torps are just graphics so it looks half-way decent. If this weren't the case the weapon would have to constantly calculate it's chance to hit as the conditions changed on it's way to the target.
Robb Stark:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The hit percentages are all the same. The only modifiers I'm aware of are AV, EM, target size, computer, and officer rating. I was under the impression that going to warp simply increased speed, therefore angular velocity.
Are some weapons specifically coded NOT to work against warping ships (like the tractor beam)??
--- End quote ---
The thing isn't that hit percentages are different, but rather the different "physics" between weapons...weapons in SFC3 fall into two distinct categories (throwing out mines of any kind): instantaneous weapons (beams), and direct-fire (torps)...beams travel instantaneously to the target, including those at warp, and get their normal chance at hitting in such situations; direct-fire weapons, which cover torpedoes and bolt-firing primaries, are basically really fast seeking weapons, with a limited ability to adjust course to intercept the target in question...at the point of intercept, the process of determining whether the target is hit is done by the normal to-hit calculations. The thing about direct-fire weapons and warping targets is that warping targets move quickly enough that direct-fire weapons cannot adjust their course enough to ever intercept them went fired at an angle oblique to the targets course, so with the target never intercepted, their is no to-hit calculation...this is fine and good with torps, from some previous posts, it was always intended, but because klink dizzies and pulse phasers use the same "physics" as torps, they kinda get screwed, IMHO anyway.
I can understand your skepticism, but I've flown both sides of the fence, and tested this quite a bit...because seeing is believing, I would suggest looking at the replay I mentioned in my previous post, it's less than 1 MB, and is quite illuminating, I think...
--- End quote ---
Totally incorrect. To hit determination is made at the time of firing( ie when the z key is pressed). The "seeking" torps are just graphics so it looks half-way decent. If this weren't the case the weapon would have to constantly calculate it's chance to hit as the conditions changed on it's way to the target.
--- End quote ---
I don't see how this could be true. I have been able to warp away from an incoming torpedo when the timing is right. The torp has been fired, it's "in the air" while my warp drive is warming up, and then my ship warps before it hits me. The torpedo sails harmlessly behind me. This seems to indicate that the hit result is calculated when the torpedo reaches me (or the spot where I was) rather than when it was fired.
Cmdr. Krotz:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The hit percentages are all the same. The only modifiers I'm aware of are AV, EM, target size, computer, and officer rating. I was under the impression that going to warp simply increased speed, therefore angular velocity.
Are some weapons specifically coded NOT to work against warping ships (like the tractor beam)??
--- End quote ---
The thing isn't that hit percentages are different, but rather the different "physics" between weapons...weapons in SFC3 fall into two distinct categories (throwing out mines of any kind): instantaneous weapons (beams), and direct-fire (torps)...beams travel instantaneously to the target, including those at warp, and get their normal chance at hitting in such situations; direct-fire weapons, which cover torpedoes and bolt-firing primaries, are basically really fast seeking weapons, with a limited ability to adjust course to intercept the target in question...at the point of intercept, the process of determining whether the target is hit is done by the normal to-hit calculations. The thing about direct-fire weapons and warping targets is that warping targets move quickly enough that direct-fire weapons cannot adjust their course enough to ever intercept them went fired at an angle oblique to the targets course, so with the target never intercepted, their is no to-hit calculation...this is fine and good with torps, from some previous posts, it was always intended, but because klink dizzies and pulse phasers use the same "physics" as torps, they kinda get screwed, IMHO anyway.
I can understand your skepticism, but I've flown both sides of the fence, and tested this quite a bit...because seeing is believing, I would suggest looking at the replay I mentioned in my previous post, it's less than 1 MB, and is quite illuminating, I think...
--- End quote ---
Totally incorrect. To hit determination is made at the time of firing( ie when the z key is pressed). The "seeking" torps are just graphics so it looks half-way decent. If this weren't the case the weapon would have to constantly calculate it's chance to hit as the conditions changed on it's way to the target.
--- End quote ---
You are right, I am incorrect, to the extent I got the mechanism backwards...the to-hit calculations are done at point of firing, but torp/bolt damage effects won't happen until the torp/bolt object physically connects, which does not happen in the previously stated case, as they have only a very limited "tracking" angle. But, in the end, the effect is the same.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version