View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:58 pm



Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Created 2 new(?) weapon types - unsure about P costs 
Author Message

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:32 am
Posts: 17
Reply with quote
Hey there! I'm new around here, although I've played around with the vanilla factions and tweaked my own a lot. But I've added a couple things that I find difficult to price properly, which bugs me, since I don't like my stuff being imbalanced with the vanilla factions.
Usually I either compare my custom blocks to existing ones or derive P costs via the simplest ratio. While loading certain values that I think are more or less important.

It's just two specific things that I just can't sort out. Now I'm not sure if other mods have stuff like this already, I just know that the vanilla game doesn't. And I didn't find examples made by others. First one is simply a cannon with high AOE, but no range - so instead of firing a projectile, it creates instant explosions/epilepsy around the cannon block. The cannon definition looks something like this:
Code:
cannon={
        roundsPerSec=0.195,
        explosive=FINAL,
        muzzleVel=1.000,
        power=500.000,
        damage=813.000,
        color=0x00bfff,
        range=0.001,
        explodeRadius=375.000
}

The game doesn't give me any P cost, I guess the specific values break this: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=484801919. I tried to do it manually by using the AOE radius instead of range, but wasn't to happy with the result either - because I'm not sure what to use as a muzzle velocity. MV would vastly influence the costs, but since the damage is instant... I don't know.

The second block is something I like very much:
Code:
replicateBlock={
                shape=ISOTRI_25,
                features=MELEE,
                scale=3,
                group=66,
                lifetime=0.750,
                points=0,
                durability=0.150,
                density=0.750,
                fillColor=0x330000,
                fillColor1=0x660000,
                lineColor=0x110000
}
, replicateTime=3.000
, launcherPower=375.000
, launcherSpeed=3000.000

Inspired by modern day armor piercing tank rounds, the unguided projectiles of this launcher don't carry a payload, but work via impact force alone. But obviously there is no point of comparison for this thing... And it's effectiveness largely depends on your enemy, too, so I can't satisfyingly playtest it either - it rips through pretty much the entire default F3 fleetpalette. But it seems a bit glitchy and doesn't work so well against high HP skeletal ships. Then again it ignores shields. But you have to use it at the correct range/angle in order to use it to full effect (it can actually bounce of an enemy or debris and not do much).

So, if anybody has some input on how I could balance these out, that would be lovely =] I won't post the P values I have currently assigned, so you don't get influenced...

(My mod is not on the workshop, because it became a relaxing hobby for me to fiddle with the numbers, before I go to bed :P so it's always changing and I don't want to publish until I'm happy with it...)


Wed Aug 12, 2015 6:39 am
Profile

Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:08 am
Posts: 97
Reply with quote
Greetings Datnabe, good to meet you. I thought I would see if I could offer any advice since I've had quite a bit of time playing around with cannons and also, funny enough, I've played around with a very similar launcher concept for a good while (it used ISOTRI_13 but otherwise nearly identical).

Launcher: I did the same thing thinking it would be cool to "invent" the "ballistic" weapon and I came to very similar conclusions to the ones you've cited; this type of weapon is unreliable, difficult to use effectively even if you could get reliable damage out of them, and against certain foes or if fired at the right angle/velocity/range combo these things are downright MASSIVELY overpowered. Crazy stuff like at 100 range they would sometimes deal 8,000 damage to an asteroid but at 400 range would sometimes bounce off dealing only a couple of hundred damage. I hated to do it but the answer for me was to junk the concept because I didn't figure anyone would have too much of a fun time (like I did :D) trying to master the split second angles/shots that Reassembly needs for them to be worth the points value that their massive potential demanded. However, for your particular block just to offer a pt's value guess I'd say it should be in something like 190 to 240 depending on if you're getting better performance than my scale 3 ISOTRI_13s were getting. Also, just a final note but if you've got those on a "RECT_LAUNCHER1" as I would think given how they work, I would say the "true" points value should be calculated as if the launcherOutSpeed were actually the thrusterForce/muzzleVelocity worth of P. This is because the launcherOutSpeed, as a value describing how fast a block is launched out from or away from the launcher is a huge benefit in this case because RECT_LAUNCHER1 launches it's projectile straight-forward towards an intended target and this gives the weapon a much shorter travel time to target and a much greater impact velocity. But you're right, since launcherOutSpeed doesn't at all effect game generated P values to begin with it's a very tough one to call confidently. I'm interested to know your number :D

Cannon: First off, I really dig the effect here...totally sweet. That being said the effectiveness of this thing is incredible and the points value should reflect it I think. Also, you're correct that range is one of the primary determinants for cannon P value so your range of 0.001 did, in fact, "break" how P is calculated here. Anyway, since "On top of myself and 375.00 in every direction" is a range that's not hard to get into with just about every ship in the game (albeit with serious varying risks to self) I really don't feel like the range should be bringing the cost of the weapon down at all and we should just be looking at how much an explosion of 813.000 damage with a radius of 375.000 goes for (also should note after 400.000 damage cannons stop counting any P increases so there's that too ;) )

Anyway, that being said if you create a launched block that does nothing but barely slide off the launcher right where your ship is and wished that that it could explode for contact with an enemy (and these things are WAY harder to get into a good spot for the delayed explosion to matter) and they replicates once every 5 seconds....the calculated P value according to Reassembly is 457P. I think more realistically it's about 350P worth of the "I win!" button and due to the radius nature of explosions must one shot any and every Red or Crystallite ship that is unfortunate to get within your doom radius.

Anyway, I had great time doing this brief analysis and I hope that it in some way helps you find a points value to nail down for your very cool toys.

Cheers!
-Ha11uc1n0g3n

P.S. I have a guide out in the Steam Community Guides section all about how Cannon P cost is calculuated if you're interested. Link is: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... =484801919


Wed Aug 12, 2015 7:48 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:32 am
Posts: 17
Reply with quote
Nice to hear that my question caused some entertainment - and thanks for the compliments regarding my "toys" :D

About your input...
Quote:
for your particular block just to offer a pt's value guess I'd say it should be in something like 190 to 240 depending on if you're getting better performance than my scale 3 ISOTRI_13s were getting

Initially I chose thinner shapes, too. In fact, I started out with the ISOTRI_6. What I found though, was that the wider the point of the impactor (and therefore the overall shape), the more reliable the weapon becomes. More on the "why" follows below...

Quote:
the "true" points value should be calculated as if the launcherOutSpeed were actually the thrusterForce/muzzleVelocity worth of P. This is because the launcherOutSpeed, as a value describing how fast a block is launched out from or away from the launcher is a huge benefit in this case because RECT_LAUNCHER1 launches it's projectile straight-forward towards an intended target and this gives the weapon a much shorter travel time to target and a much greater impact velocity

Just to put it out there, I have no idea how this game calculates impact damage, so the following is nothing more than speculation.
I assume that due to the limited number of physics ticks, two values make the weapon less reliable: Cross section of the impactor and velocity.
If the game checks for overlaps n times a second and the impactor would need x ms to pass through an object, a higher velocity and smaller cross section reduces x and increases the chance of the overlap going unnoticed by the game (by passing through in x<1s/n).
This issue could be more or less prevalent in different blocks, depending on where the game checks for overlaps - at the edges of an object or inside it. Since it seems like faction 3 ships (many, tiny blocks = more surface/area) absorb less energy from the impactor, I guess it's the insides.
So I'm currently going with less velocity and more mass (by using wider shapes with differing density), since I assume that the mass has significant influence on impact damage as well.
Problem with that is the range, since objects loose velocity over range... But shorter range weapons go better with the overall theme anyway^^
Quote:
I'm interested to know your number

Well... I tried to asses the killing potential by shooting /target blocks with different weapons and weapon combinations - and eventually ended up with 2284P :P
Quote:
I hated to do it but the answer for me was to junk the concept

I did the same thing, but I brought it back a couple times^^ I've now split the weapon into two versions. The stronger of which has roughly a third of the muzzle velocity and 9 times the density, compared to the one I posted. Works a bit like a bunch of large Quantum Doom Beams, only with slightly longer range. It's pretty reliable now, too, so I set it to 280P and will play with it for a bit, to see how it does.

About the cannon...
Quote:
if you create a launched block that does nothing but barely slide off the launcher right where your ship is

Why didn't I think of that... Set lifetime=0.001 and you get the exact same effect... Dammit :D
Now I have set the cannon I posted to 375P and adjusted the 2 smaller versions accordingly.

Quote:
I have a guide out in the Steam Community Guides section all about how Cannon P cost
Which I linked to, in the middle of my wall of text ;P



Thank you for your input, especially on the cannon, I'm a lot more comfortable with the new values!


Thu Aug 13, 2015 6:47 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:30 pm
Posts: 151
Location: The Core!
Reply with quote
datnade wrote:
So I'm currently going with less velocity and more mass (by using wider shapes with differing density), since I assume that the mass has significant influence on impact damage as well.
Problem with that is the range, since objects loose velocity over range... But shorter range weapons go better with the overall theme anyway^^.


I believe I may have solved that problem. After experimenting with lightweight, high durability armor blocks. I had discovered that a block's durability has a greater effect on impact damage than it's density. This discovery led me to create a rocket propelled slug that goes through light armor as if it's made of butter.

Code:
 {90, bindingId=4, shape=RECT_LAUNCHER1, name="Gyroc Launcher",
  features=LAUNCHER,
  group=20,
  points=31,
  durability=0.500,
  blurb="Launches a rocket propelled slug with limited tracking ability",
  density=0.150,
  fillColor=0x49b821,
  fillColor1=0x72ba34,
  lineColor=0x92ff3d,
  thrusterColor=0x639caf,
  thrusterColor1=0x4d4d4d,
  replicateBlock={
   command={},
   shape=MISSILE,
   scale=2,
   features=COMMAND|THRUSTER|TORQUER|MELEE|FREERES,
   group=20,
   lifetime=2.500,
   durability=10.000,
   density=0.100,
   fillColor=0x72ba34,
   fillColor1=0x96ca33,
   lineColor=0x92ff3d,
   capacity=100.000,
   thrusterForce=24000.000,
   thrusterColor=0x9030464d,
   thrusterColor1=0x9080e158,
   torquerTorque=2500.000,},
  replicateTime=0.250,
  launcherPower=5.000,
  launcherOutSpeed=50.000}

_________________
The New Terran Republic [http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=492719578]
The New Terran Republic V2.0 [http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=659890051]


Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:23 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:32 am
Posts: 17
Reply with quote
There's a couple reasons for why I am not happy with your design:

Firstly, the main issue was never effectiveness, but consistency. Therefore I moved on to larger shapes, which work quite well.

Secondly, P pricing. A weapon that can ignore shields, penetrate armor and instantly kill the command module is... Difficult to classify.

So I turned my design into a lower-damage impactor, not capable of penetration, but just damage, by adjusting the meleeDamage variable. Now when you remove the COMMAND feature, you get a dumb fired, medium damage impactor that ignores shields and doesn't get targeted by PD. That's new.
I think it's pretty cool, too. And that's why it's going to be part of my next faction, the Last Crusade's antagonists...

But hey, nice input with the durability!


Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:01 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:09 pm
Posts: 7
Reply with quote
Just throwing this out there, I have not yet started modding so this answer is probably wrong, but anyway... To avoid breaking the established P cost formula, I would say that your explosion damage is not instant. The same way that you use radius instead of range, you could use radius instead of muzzle velocity by taking into account that the explosion will trigger on the next step of the physics engine, 1/60th of a second after firing. So, radius * 60 is your effective muzzle velocity.


Wed Sep 30, 2015 4:59 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 10:08 am
Posts: 97
Reply with quote
@ Boggers

I don't mean to be rude when I say this because Reassembly has absolutely become one of my most played games of all time and an ongoing addiction (1700+ hours) but...

The "established P cost" system that is built into the game is so flawed that I'm absolutely going to redo it and re-P everything in the game one of these days. Until then, I just look at it as a helpful guideline because it manages to do an *almost* reasonable job of calculating balanced P costs if the weapons you've modded fall within the same general ranges, velocities, effect etc. that are already represented by weapons in game.

I suspect the P cost system was an extrapolation of creating ships and having the AI tournament battle with them, followed by recording the "points" scored by each and then using that as a basis for the background calculations...but I could be 100% wrong on that, just a theory :D


Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:19 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 7 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software