Miss rates

[Myles]

posted on June 19th, 2010, 11:58 am

Last edited by Myles on June 19th, 2010, 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I have a few suggestions about miss rates
[align=center]1) Beams can miss[/align]

I suggest that beams be given a small miss rate. To my understanding, the current reason stuff misses is mainly because of ECM confusing targetting sensors and not all because of size of target.

It seems rational that ECM could confuse targetting sensors into firing so off target that they miss a small ship.

For larger ships the weapons wont hit where they were supposed to, but hit another part of the large ship.

So my proposition is:

• the current system for torps/pulses is unchanged.
• beams can miss only small targets and miss 15% of the time. ships with better ECM like the sabre get small boosts to their dodge chance for beams too.

[align=center]2) Higher rank reduces miss rate/dodge chance[/align]

This suggestion is in two parts.

Firstly, when you rankup you get slightly more chance to hit stuff with all weapons. The exact numbers would be decided by the devs. As you rankup your tactical officer gets better at hitting the target. So the hit rate would increase by a small amount. Not all the way to 100% hit chance, but higher than unranked.

Secondly, when you rank up you get slightly more chance to dodge incoming fire, because your helmsman can fly more complicated evasive patterns and your engineers can increase the effectiveness of ECM for the particular ship. Again the percentage changes wouldn't be huge, just a small amount.

To prevent ranked ships becoming even more powerful the ranked ships would get less of an increase in the power of their weapons. So their additional offence value comes partially from the hit/dodge rates increase and partially from better weapons being given to the expert crews.

[align=center]3) Support ships have better hit rates[/align]

A simpler suggestion, support ships can use the vast technology like improved sensors, to augment their targetting sensors, meaning they hit the target more. Also support ships are likely to be full to the brim with officers like Jadzia Dax, smart scientists who can figure out clever ways of countering ECM.

If this is not popular for support ships then maybe only for the federation support ships, or only for one support ship, or as a special weapon etc.

This leads me on to my next point

[align=center]4) A new special weapon for a support ship[/align]

I was thinking of a new special weapon for a support ship (doesn't really matter which support ship gets the weapon, but preferably not feds as they have good support already) which increases the hit rate of ships nearby.

The special weapon would be an energy consumption per second weapon like ECM on the Remore. When triggered the ship would use its advanced sensors to augment targetting sensors on ships nearby, increasing the hit rates of a limited number of vessels. Similar to how the C-11 can increase range, the weapon I propose would increase their hit rates.

EDIT: corrected a very serious typo

posted on June 19th, 2010, 1:28 pm

I think the reason people don't like beams missing had something to do with the animation... or something.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 2:48 pm

hmm... I think this is a pretty cool idea! 

posted on June 19th, 2010, 3:11 pm

I really like suggestion 4.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 3:32 pm

I think the reason people don't like beams missing had something to do with the animation... or something.

I remember the phaser missing effect for firing into a certain nebula, the result is a thinner beam that seems to go on forever past the screen. Also has happened at least on opening shots of a huge fleet battle, all the phasers seemed to go on forever really thin.

My thoughts on the gameplay aspects of the ideas:

I would like to see small ships get 25% beam missing actually, 15% seems a bit small.
It would lead to something more like canon Defiant vs. Bug  (Bug beams miss a lot, some of the pulses from Defiant don't hit.)

I like the dodge and hitting changing with rank up.
I think that the defense value increases for ranked ships should be less in addition to lowered offensive increases. Would still increase combat effectiveness, but with a more logical reason (you can't really make shields and weapons that much stronger, and I have no idea how you'd explain the increased hull points, magical elves summoned by killing ships maybe?  )
Vet passives that increase off/def still ok.

I really like support ships having higher hit chances.
Maybe 100% with beams, 70% with torps, and 90% with pulses? Perhaps they could start out with lower hit chances that are just above the normal combat ships, then increase with the system upgrades.

I don't really care much for support specials, but that would add even more options for when I'm bored and need to fry some Klingons.
I think it would be best to give it to the Romulans. They seem like just the ones to circumvent the countermeasures and get all their weapons hitting.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 3:38 pm

I think movement should have some influence on hitrate. It's esier to hit something that's sitting still than something moving, especially since it could change direction at any time.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 3:50 pm

Now if only they brought back Attack Patterns. Imagine the old Hit & Run formation could give you a better chance of precise bamaging hits but leave you more open to attacks, while Cloverleaf could be a defensive pattern, reducing the damage you take. 

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on June 19th, 2010, 3:54 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on June 19th, 2010, 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I also think we should give the canon vessels plot armor and shielding, as that's proven to be how things work and canon > silly real physics. Just imagine, you could take your Defiant just like in DS9, click "plot shielding" and WHAM suddenly it's missed by beams, blows up ships in a few shots, and rarely misses (except when leading on a ship). That'd be AWESOME!  :woot: . Hey, we could even give some ships the dreaded "coolness button"! Imagine, you could fly your Saber in between a D'deridex, or maybe your ship just suddenly becomes invulnerable to everything because The Captain is on board.  :pimp:

I like idea four, and dislike the rest - however, it really does sound like a Federation style ability .

EDIT: I forgot one crucial detail. You'd have to make pulses miss the same or more than beams due to the same technology and because that's how it was on the show. Plus, everybody knows that lazorz are more accurate than bulletz.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 4:11 pm

I also think we should give the canon vessels plot armor and shielding, as that's proven to be how things work and canon > silly real physics. Just imagine, you could take your Defiant just like in DS9, click "plot shielding" and WHAM suddenly it's missed by beams, blows up ships in a few shots, and rarely misses (except when leading on a ship). That'd be AWESOME!  :woot: . Hey, we could even give some ships the dreaded "coolness button"! Imagine, you could fly your Saber in between a D'deridex, or maybe your ship just suddenly becomes invulnerable to everything because The Captain is on board.  :pimp:

That would actually be cool.
All I'm saying with the Defiant vs. Bug thing is that FO has already taken the "weapons can miss" thing from DS9 (which was nothing but plot armor, so actually FO already has mild plot armor incorporated into the gameplay.) We might as well take the "beams also can miss" thing too. If you don't want a Defiant with beams sometimes missing it, then don't have torpedoes miss so much either. Need to take out a Defiant? Get a few support ships that won't miss it.

[Myles]

posted on June 19th, 2010, 4:40 pm

Last edited by Myles on June 19th, 2010, 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

EDIT: I forgot one crucial detail. You'd have to make pulses miss the same or more than beams due to the same technology and because that's how it was on the show. Plus, everybody knows that lazorz are more accurate than bulletz.

yes they should, in ds9 paradise lost the defiant misses with pulses quite badly

i agree that phasers and pulses are more accurate than torps. but the the way i understand ECM in fleetops is that it confuses the targetting ship BEFORE it fires AND during the weapon travel time. that is why torps miss so bad, because both the targetting ship and the guidance on the torp are being confused.

for phasers and pulses (which have very little travel time) the ECM would confuse the targetting sensors of the firing ship, meaning they might shoot several metres off target. now on a big target a few metres dont matter and you would just hit another part of the ship, but on a little ship, a few metres can place your actual fire off target.

the remore ECM button shows what the ECM might do to the enemy sensors, it fools the enemy into seeing several (slightly shifted) ships, only one of which is the real ship, the others are fakes. so the targetting sensors might pick the wrong ship to fire at.

once the ship fires, the ECM can't fool a phaser beam or pulse that is travelling and it is either a hit or miss. but for a torp which can change direction (and will usually have to change direction for a moving target) there is more time for ECM to confuse the sensors.

this links back to tyler saying miss rate should be tied to movement, i agree with that, but only for torps.  torp fired at a stationary target doesnt need to change course and so it cant be fooled en route to target.

EDIT: lazors may be more accurate than torps, if you pick a spot and fire at it (regardless of whether a target is there or not ) the lazor is more likely to hit that spot. but if the ECM confuses your ship's targetting sensors about where the enemy ship is, then you may aim at a part of space with no enemy ship. you would hit where you aimed, but not hit the enemy, as you aimed at the wrong place.

[Nebula_Class_Ftw]

posted on June 19th, 2010, 4:53 pm

Last edited by Nebula_Class_Ftw on June 19th, 2010, 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yes they should, in ds9 paradise lost the defiant misses with pulses quite badly

i agree that phasers and pulses are more accurate than torps. but the the way i understand ECM in fleetops is that it confuses the targetting ship BEFORE it fires AND during the weapon travel time. that is why torps miss so bad, because both the targetting ship and the guidance on the torp are being confused.

for phasers and pulses (which have very little travel time) the ECM would confuse the targetting sensors of the firing ship, meaning they might shoot several metres off target. now on a big target a few metres dont matter and you would just hit another part of the ship, but on a little ship, a few metres can place your actual fire off target.

the remore ECM button shows what the ECM might do to the enemy sensors, it fools the enemy into seeing several (slightly shifted) ships, only one of which is the real ship, the others are fakes. so the targetting sensors might pick the wrong ship to fire at.

once the ship fires, the ECM can't fool a phaser beam or pulse that is travelling and it is either a hit or miss. but for a torp which can change direction (and will usually have to change direction for a moving target) there is more time for ECM to confuse the sensors.

this links back to tyler saying miss rate should be tied to movement, i agree with that, but only for torps.  torp fired at a stationary target doesnt need to change course and so it cant be fooled en route to target.

Agreed for everything, except the last paragraph. The sensor ghosts that the torp sees might include one of the ship moving from its current position, so a stationary ship would make the torp think it had moved, and that the stationary target was a fake. A moving target could also use a sensor ghost to make the torp think it was still sitting still. So there would be no difference.

I think movement should have some influence on hitrate. It's esier to hit something that's sitting still than something moving, especially since it could change direction at any time.

Actually, I remember reading about this exact idea, on the FO FAQ regarding why fighters are useless in TNG (I bolded some parts for emphasis, original has no bold letters):
"Usually a twenty fourth century starship computer would be good enough to pre-calculate movement, as even your personal computer can do that (which is also why moving vessels in Fleet Operations receive no weapon avoidance benefits)!"
It goes on to say the only reason fighters and such can exist in DS9 would be due to weapons missing for good action effects (logically reasoned by the devs to be due to ECM, not anything about speed.)
The devs have stat that even their mobile phones can calculate three seperate movement trajectories (in an explanation as to why MVAM would be useless.) Once again Tyler, you're severely underestimating the speed and accuracy of a computer figuring out where something is.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 5:10 pm

Yes, because Pulse Phasers and Beam Phasers can obviously change direction and loop around to hit something that isn't in the same place as when they fired... if I was talking about Torpedoes and their built-in targeting sensors, I'd have mentioned Torpedoes and their built-in targeting sensors.

Try reading and don't start this 'Computers are perfect targeters' again. The fact that I mentioned easier instead of guaranteed miss with no mentioned of computer limits should tell you something.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 5:23 pm

Ah the "move out of the way" kind of thing? That isn't possible with the way the engine does weapons hitting. The decision to hit or not is made when the weapon fires, so it's predetermined to hit or miss. You may notice that currently pulse phasers in FO do change direction (when I first saw this I reported it as a bug, devs said it has always happened and there is no fix in the near-future.)

The travel time for such weapons is very small, you had better have a scout ship at long range to manage not to get hit by the weapons (which is how I noticed the problem, a scout flew by my Starbase, and the pulses curved to hit it.) Beam phasers could easily change firing angle while firing to keep up with the enemy ship's movements, so only part of the beam would miss. I doubt the devs are going to try and simulate the results of such missing by either weapon.

Also, I did read your earlier statement, it said that it's easier to hit something sitting still, it said nothing about why they are easier to hit. Saying nothing about guaranteed miss didn't tell me anything, let alone specify whether you were talking about computer limits or not.
I only talked about the torps in response to myles, not you.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 5:37 pm

Maybe I wasn't very specific, I'll have to remember that in future.

I'm not sure how having Hit and miss being predetermined fits, that happens with everything 'random' in the game. I noticed the pulse bug, that's why I mentioned the possibility of missing; it wouldn't solve it, but might lessen it a bit.

Plus, pulse weapons would have to 'lead the target', which would require the ship always moving to face ahead in the targets direction. Most normally tend to be fixed turrets.

posted on June 19th, 2010, 5:56 pm

Wow, people actually took my severe sarcasm and ran with it 

The pulse changing direction is due to the odf label being changed (it's now a SOD). Looks a tad odd, but what can ya do