Jump to content


MOO2 missile behaviour


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

M002mod #1 Posted 08 November 2015 - 09:08 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 242
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

Question about missiles-


Missiles work slightly differently depending on if you have Ship Initiative set on or off in the game.


With initiative on - as the game should be played - missiles have a curious 1st/2nd turn behaviour. 
The easiest way to observe the difference is to look at star base / missile base behaviour. 
With IN on, the first round shot and 2nd round shot will combine into 1 volley, if both are fired at the same target and that target has not moved.

 

This is not the case when IN is off, when each volley follows its own speed
(1st volley leaves already at the end of the first turn)


My question is which missile behaviour do you prefer, with IN on or off? [ all random thoughts on the matter are welcome  :) ]



Bosparan #2 Posted 09 November 2015 - 12:35 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 29
  • Member since:
    11-05-2015

Wellllll ... truth be told, I haven't used missiles in more than a decade :)

There's just this thing about gunboat diplomacy, that's just clouded my judgement. I'd always just build the perfect longrange gunslinger and then ruin some AI's day.

 

Regarding the salvo issue though ... generally, it wouldn't matter, would it? The target keeps moving. That said, combining two shots into one salvo has its own charm - it makes it harder to intercept and shoot down. On the other hand, if memory serves, the ai never did that anyway, and against players ... well, that's what I keep firecrackers (small fast ships with pulsars equipped. Lots of fun ^^) around, which kind of ruin any salvo's day, no matter how dense.

Generally speakin', on average I'd prefer salvos kept separate. Bunching them up makes them vulnerable to AoE (including an exploding ship, preventing excess missiles from retargeting).



diehardtwinsfan #3 Posted 02 December 2015 - 01:44 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 510
  • Member since:
    10-05-2015
Missiles were generally worthless in MOO2.  They were destructive enough in MOO3 that I used them quite a bit (though the AI's decision to launch them at bunch of fighters or other missiles really really bothered me).  Might be nice to see a bit of a meld between MOO2 and 3.  Make them a bit more difficult to deal with while using them in an intelligent way.

M002mod #4 Posted 02 December 2015 - 01:46 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 242
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

View Postdiehardtwinsfan, on 02 December 2015 - 01:44 AM, said:

Missiles were generally worthless in MOO2.  

Nuclear Missile is the best early game weapon that is available to all and you can win ANY map, small-huge on Impossible difficulty with this weapon.

Merculite Missile is the weapon of choice for taking down the Guardian.


Edited by M002mod, 02 December 2015 - 04:53 PM.


diehardtwinsfan #5 Posted 04 December 2015 - 02:47 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 510
  • Member since:
    10-05-2015

View PostM002mod, on 02 December 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

Nuclear Missile is the best early game weapon that is available to all and you can win ANY map, small-huge on Impossible difficulty with this weapon.

Merculite Missile is the weapon of choice for taking down the Guardian.

 

Agreed that they had value early in game.  I just found them to be largely worthless.   MOO3 probably over did it to the other extreme, but I think they had the right idea.  They needed more punch than what they had in MOO2.



voidstalker_woe #6 Posted 20 December 2015 - 11:03 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 309
  • Member since:
    12-20-2015

For my games, I go heavy on chemistry up to atmo, then make a quick grab for battle pods, and it's on.  I also always use the spy bonus, and build 5 spies for each race.  Seems to work out nicely, but you have to remember to 'share the wealth' when stealing techs.

 

Later game, I switch over to Neutron blaster, tractor beams, transporters and assault shuttles.

 

One thing I really hated was missiles getting "free" movement, after a retreat by 1st target, they then got to move more, and repeat this for each retreating target.


Further more, I believe that we must start building a better MoO5 now, for only by doing so can we get tomorrow's game, today!

Seablaze1234 #7 Posted 09 January 2016 - 10:26 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

I think one of the biggest issues in MoO2 was the 'shrouding' of missiles. For example, if you place two sets of nuclear missiles on a ship, with the first one listed as basic missiles, while the second have the MIRV upgrade, the 'dummy' missiles will ALWAYS be shot first - the game will render the basic missiles above the MIRV missiles, I don't think you can actually target them. I think it was fair to trigger PD weapons with FAST missiles, as they reached the target first, but you can basically exploit the game engine to force missile defences to target dummy missiles.


 

It would probably be nice to see all missile stacks combine, regardless of upgrades (Except FAST missiles, which will naturally outpace other missiles), so point defence weapons have a chance to destroy 'dummy' and 'real' missiles, based on the ratio of each.


 

View Postvoidstalker_woe, on 20 December 2015 - 11:03 AM, said:

One thing I really hated was missiles getting "free" movement, after a retreat by 1st target, they then got to move more, and repeat this for each retreating target.

 


 

As for the Dauntless Guidance System granting missiles 'extra' movement, I think it was related to the game engine, as missiles moved when the target ship did, and ships needed to turn (move) to retreat. I don't think we'll see a return of this, although I also don't think I've ever lost a ship to it.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users