Wings vs. wings

Hi!

One of the things left in new combat code is a review of the wing
firing at a wing code.

Currently we have amazing bonuses for the bigger wings. For example a
single shot from a bigger wing can kill up to ~27 enemy fighter in the
smaller.

To give a most extreme example: An Ahir micro wing of 10 fighters
against an 1K Rutzie wing is a ridicilous game. The Ahir is
desintigrated faster than one can look. The aforementioned bonus was
introduced when (I think after the D4 tournament) micro wings came
into vogue in great quantities. People where forced into awful micro
management.

But nowadays we have mighty group and fleet management and the next
client release will let the "hearts beat higher" (a german phrase) one
more time ("Hail to Magik!") and also big wings has minor advantages
in the new model anyway.

So this bonuses are already regarded as history in the coding team.

But even without them and if one only takes the races which are
commonly regared as fighter races (Rebel, CoM, EE, Bot, Cents,
Sol,...) one gets difficulties to get small wings vs. big wings into a
range where one can speak of balance.

So a first attempt is to make higher armored fighters more resistent
against incoming fire. But if you model the armor effect so that Ahirs
come into a balanced range against the other end of the scale (i.e.
Rutzies) then the Ahir is God like against for other good types, e.g.
the good Rebel or CoM fighter types. The reason is that there is one
thing missing we have in wing versus ship: The weapon strengths have
an effect on the size of the drain/damage they inflict. But a fighter
is either killed or not.

So I was remembered to the aformentioned current multi kill abilities
with the idea to form a "very good" fighter type only if several stats
are good. If one looks at the fighter type list then the costs of a
type often scales with armor and beam (but not missile) strength. So I
found by sims that one can get balancing results which point into a
promising direction if one introduces a good mixture of armor
resistence and multi kills depending on the beam strength. This multi
kill could be regared as energy which punches thru a fighter wing and
hits another fighter or exploding fighters destroy fighters in their
neighborhood. Currently I'm playing arround with this kill formula:

kills per hitting beam shot = 1 + INT((1+beam/100)*RND)

So a Ahir had 1 + INT((3*RND). 33% of the time a hitting shot then
would kill 1 fighter, 33% of the time it would kill 2 fighters and 33%
of the time 3 fighters. In the mean it would kill 2 fighters.

So I would like to ask if it would be a problem for you to introduce
such multi kill beam strength related thing?

Another question as we talk about fighters: Often I heard player
complaining about the missile wepaons of fighters. The asked "Can't we
just get rid of them?". They said "They are of no really worth!" or
"What can they do what beams can't besides the longer range?"

As we have introduced the ability to re-arm wings in combat by
carriers I would like to make missiles more interesting. Something
they can do what beam can't do or at least not so effectively. We are
open for any suggestions. Any ideas?

GFM GToeroe

On Mar 12, 10:03 am, GFM GToeroe <g....TakeThisOut@gtoeroe.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> One of the things left in new combat code is a review of the wing
> firing at a wing code.
>
> Currently we have amazing bonuses for the bigger wings. For example a
> single shot from a bigger wing can kill up to ~27 enemy fighter in the
> smaller.
>
> To give a most extreme example: An Ahir micro wing of 10 fighters
> against an 1K Rutzie wing is a ridicilous game. The Ahir is
> desintigrated faster than one can look. The aforementioned bonus was
> introduced when (I think after the D4 tournament) micro wings came
> into vogue in great quantities. People where forced into awful micro
> management.
>
> But nowadays we have mighty group and fleet management and the next
> client release will let the "hearts beat higher" (a german phrase) one
> more time ("Hail to Magik!") and also big wings has minor advantages
> in the new model anyway.
>
> So this bonuses are already regarded as history in the coding team.
>
> But even without them and if one only takes the races which are
> commonly regared as fighter races (Rebel, CoM, EE, Bot, Cents,
> Sol,...) one gets difficulties to get small wings vs. big wings into a
> range where one can speak of balance.
>
> So a first attempt is to make higher armored fighters more resistent
> against incoming fire. But if you model the armor effect so that Ahirs
> come into a balanced range against the other end of the scale (i.e.
> Rutzies) then the Ahir is God like against for other good types, e.g.
> the good Rebel or CoM fighter types. The reason is that there is one
> thing missing we have in wing versus ship: The weapon strengths have
> an effect on the size of the drain/damage they inflict. But a fighter
> is either killed or not.
>
> So I was remembered to the aformentioned current multi kill abilities
> with the idea to form a "very good" fighter type only if several stats
> are good. If one looks at the fighter type list then the costs of a
> type often scales with armor and beam (but not missile) strength. So I
> found by sims that one can get balancing results which point into a
> promising direction if one introduces a good mixture of armor
> resistence and multi kills depending on the beam strength. This multi
> kill could be regared as energy which punches thru a fighter wing and
> hits another fighter or exploding fighters destroy fighters in their
> neighborhood. Currently I'm playing arround with this kill formula:
>
> kills per hitting beam shot = 1 + INT((1+beam/100)*RND)
>
> So a Ahir had 1 + INT((3*RND). 33% of the time a hitting shot then
> would kill 1 fighter, 33% of the time it would kill 2 fighters and 33%
> of the time 3 fighters. In the mean it would kill 2 fighters.
>
> So I would like to ask if it would be a problem for you to introduce
> such multi kill beam strength related thing?
>
> Another question as we talk about fighters: Often I heard player
> complaining about the missile wepaons of fighters. The asked "Can't we
> just get rid of them?". They said "They are of no really worth!" or
> "What can they do what beams can't besides the longer range?"
>
> As we have introduced the ability to re-arm wings in combat by
> carriers I would like to make missiles more interesting. Something
> they can do what beam can't do or at least not so effectively. We are
> open for any suggestions. Any ideas?
>
> GFM GToeroe

someone mentioned earlier about flakkers and sandcasters something i
liked.

the idea was that if a sandcaster fired into a large swarm of fighters
its hit probabilities are greater(i.e. it kills a greater amount) as
opposed to firing at smaller wings, due to the large wings having to
group closer , whereas smaller wings dont have as great an area that
they cover.

now fighter versus fighter im liking the odds that a smaller wing has
a lower chance to miss 1000 fighters in a wing due them being grouped
together so tightly. i mean the sky is covered how could you possibly
miss hitting something. as opposed to firing at smaller wings spaced
out and manuevering freely ,where accuracy would be required just to
hit one of them.

the large wing multi hit is something i like, hitting 1 fighter in a
tightly group large wing could result in the debris colliding into yet
another fighter taking it out as well. or even hitting a fighter that
spins out of control into another fighter within its own group. this
is something im liking regarding large wings. in the end large wings
would be good ship killers and smaller wings better at killing larger
wings. smaller wings would have greater mobility than larger wings. as
keeping a wing together in flight would probably require lots of
pilots to maintain thier position within the large group to prevent
collisions. thus a reduction in mobility.

armor, as far as i know armor to some extent is currently not that
great in the current model. but if placed into the new combat code to
provide resistance from other fighters im all for that. however if the
armor is used to show resiliance against ships im against that. i
believe fighter armor should only be relative in fighter versus
fighter scenarios. not fighter versus ships.

reloading of ord. while i like the idea of reloding missiles during
the vcr, im kinda wondering, should it always be so. there may be
circumstances where i would rather they not reload. perhaps there are
fighter wings in the combat area that id rather they switch to attack
when thier ord has run out. as opposed to continueing thier attack on
the ships by reloading the ord. if implemented i would hope there
could be some command codes that would allow them not to reload and to
attack firghters if they remain present in the VCR if no fighters
remain then by all means reload. perhaps build in a measure that if
fighters have missiles on board and ships are present priority is to
attack ships into all ord is expended then attack fighters... once all
fighters are eliminated then reload and continue against ships.

Proto