FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login

    Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
    37 Posts 16 Posters 2.2k Views 1 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • C Offline
      clyf @brainstormer
      last edited by

      @brainstormer

      It's optimal for bombs of all sizes to explode a given distance above the ground, it's not just limited to strategic weapons. But it doesn't matter at all in-game because the ground isn't absorbing all that energy/fragmentation you would otherwise be throwing into the surrounding area.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • veteranasheV Offline
        veteranashe
        last edited by

        Would be nice to select the nuje and Ctrl k it in flight, could airburst add or something

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • TheVVheelboyT Offline
          TheVVheelboy
          last edited by

          Y-yeah. We need more ways to fuck the air player in random ass ways. It's not enough that you can ctrlk below asf to win airfight or just fly a flippin transport into enemy air.

          ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R Offline
            RedX @Jip
            last edited by

            @jip said in Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?:

            It can both be implemented, but a parabola trajectory is not recommended. it means that intermediate SMDs can not intercept the missile.

            Why would a ballistic parabola inherently mean that a missile could not be intercepted?

            TheVVheelboyT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B Offline
              brainstormer @FtXCommando
              last edited by

              @ftxcommando said in Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?:

              Nukes don't need a buff by blowing up 5 seconds earlier.

              In the end its just about a minimal amount, and probably 0.5 sec difference in time.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • TheVVheelboyT Offline
                TheVVheelboy @RedX
                last edited by

                @redx said in Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?:

                @jip said in Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?:

                It can both be implemented, but a parabola trajectory is not recommended. it means that intermediate SMDs can not intercept the missile.

                Why would a ballistic parabola inherently mean that a missile could not be intercepted?

                I might be wrong but it's cuz it makes it so that SMD won't have enough time to react to nukes heading to the frontal part of the SMD coverage. As instead of the nuke flying up high and then going straight down at the target, the nuke will head at angle towards the target. Lowering the time that SMD missile have to catch up to the nuke.

                Basically all the SMD's would now have kinda eggshaped effective range rather than a circle.

                Something like this I guess:
                Untitled.png

                C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • ZLOZ Offline
                  ZLO
                  last edited by

                  my problem with this is that you can't know for sure if your nuke gonna hit right area or gonna collide with some mountain

                  TA4Life: "At the very least we are not slaves to the UI" | http://www.youtube.com/user/dimatularus | http://www.twitch.tv/zlo_rd

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • N Offline
                    Nex
                    last edited by

                    It also makes no sense for nukes to have a ballistic trajectory since they are propelled for the whole flight. They function more like cruise missile which also roughly matches their current trajectory of staying low and doing a sharp turn near the target.
                    It's more weird that tac missiles have a ballistic trajectory, but that could be argued with that they are low cost and thus only use some cheap unguided rocket that only propells during the launch phase.
                    There is also research being done to have long range missiles that don't fly in ballistic trajectories, because that's just slower than flying straight. (at least for shorter distances of <5k km)
                    So there is zero reason why an expensive missile in a futuristic game should have a ballistic trajectory.
                    At best you'd give it like the trajectory of a hypersonic glide missile, where it goes up, then down a bit into the glide until it's above the target and then drops.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Sylph_S Offline
                      Sylph_
                      last edited by

                      I thought tactical missiles fire up into the air, then glide towards the target... This ballistic trajectory stuff regarding TMLs is confusing me!

                      C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • C Offline
                        clyf @TheVVheelboy
                        last edited by

                        @xiaomao

                        This is an excellent point (even worse, an SMD will waste an interceptor on a missile coming down in much of the red area) and would need to be addressed if parabolic trajectories were introduced.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C Offline
                          clyf @Sylph_
                          last edited by

                          @sylph_

                          You're correct, at no point is the TML projectile subject to gravity.

                          IndexLibrorumI 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • ? Offline
                            A Former User @TheVVheelboy
                            last edited by

                            @xiaomao said in Nuclear thread - can we go ballistic?:

                            Y-yeah. We need more ways to fuck the air player in random ass ways. It's not enough that you can ctrlk below asf to win airfight or just fly a flippin transport into enemy air.

                            Full share issues

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • TheVVheelboyT Offline
                              TheVVheelboy
                              last edited by

                              Y-yes. Having to avoid the flight path of the nuke with ASF is fullshare issue...

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • IndexLibrorumI Offline
                                IndexLibrorum Global Moderator @clyf
                                last edited by

                                @slicknixon I mean, that's just wrong lol

                                "Design is an iterative process. The required number of iterations is one more than the number you have currently done. This is true at any point in time."

                                See all my projects:

                                DeribusD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • DeribusD Offline
                                  Deribus Global Moderator @IndexLibrorum
                                  last edited by

                                  @indexlibrorum 0c60f706-870e-47f5-9068-8f94ee3403b5-image.png e0645586-ecb6-4e48-bc52-87d735c004b4-image.png

                                  IndexLibrorumI 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                  • IndexLibrorumI Offline
                                    IndexLibrorum Global Moderator @Deribus
                                    last edited by

                                    @deribus I spoke without knowing what I speak about! I figured to get the curve you'd need for a missile gravity was necessary. Sorry @SlickNixon 😄

                                    "Design is an iterative process. The required number of iterations is one more than the number you have currently done. This is true at any point in time."

                                    See all my projects:

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • F Offline
                                      FunkOff
                                      last edited by

                                      There are two ways to get a projectile to curve. One, fire is ballistically, meaning gravity is on and flight controls/propulsion are off. Second, reverse it, but give the missile instructions. This is what the nuke does. It flies up, turns 90 degrees towards the target, then another 90 degrees when it's very close to the target. A rectangular trajectory.

                                      Parabolic or parabolic-ish trajectory could be easily programmed similar to how it's done in MMLs: Set the missile's turn radius to be a function of it's distance from the target upon launch. With calibration, this will make an eliptical trajectory. It will also clear terrain easily, except possibly tall mountains on short distance shots. The main problem with this would be that it would make nukes spend a lot more time in the air generally, and this problem would be much worse for further targets.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • First post
                                        Last post