| Author |
Darkspace Suggestion Thread |
Red October
Fleet Admiral
Joined: May 30, 2010
Posts: 165
From: Stillwater, Oklahoma
|  Posted: 2010-07-15 00:16
ICC Weaponry
Projectile Weapons:
Name: Condensed Particle Mass Driver (CPMD) (Tier 2)
Available to: Dreadnought/Station
Ammo Count: 12
Cool Down Rate: 0.30
Minimum Range: 500 GU
Maximum Range: 1K GU
Description: CPMD is a more advance version of the PMD which fires condense particles shells at near speed of light at target ship from further distance. Due to CPMD’s size, it weapon can’t not be equipped to smaller ships unlike the smaller version of it.
Name: Particle Mass Driver (PMD) (Tier 1)
Available To: Cruisers/dreadnoughts
Ammo Count: 24
Cool Down Rate: 0.15
Minimum Range: 800 GU
Maximum Range: 1.5K GU
Description: PMD is the equivalent of a sniper rifle in space, designed to fire tightly packed particle shells long distances at targets. Unlike its’ larger version, this weapon could fire further and faster, but doesn’t pack the quite the punch.
Side note, since people been using this thread as an suggestion thread for new and exciting ideas for Darkspace, I decided to rename the thread for that purpose. Have fun with suggestions guys!
[ This Message was edited by: Alanstar on 2010-07-19 22:37 ]
_________________
|
Red October
Fleet Admiral
Joined: May 30, 2010
Posts: 165
From: Stillwater, Oklahoma
| Posted: 2010-07-15 00:16
New Electronic Warfare:
Name: Gravitational Field(SID)
Available to: Electronic Warfare Ships
Energy Drainage: 5
Cool Down Rate: 15 Seconds
Maximum Radius: 1K GU
Stackable: Yes
Description: Gravitational Field is an AoE effect that slows ships in area down, thus lowering its top speed by 6%. The more GF involved in battle, the slower the all ship become in area become.
Name: Weapon Disrupter Pulse (WDP)
Available to: Electronic Warfare Ships
Energy Drainage: 5
Cool Down Rate: 30 Seconds
Maximum Radius: 300 GU
Description: Weapon Disrupter Pulse is designed to disrupt all ships (Ally/Enemy) weapons within the radius, allowing other players to escape.
Name: Energy Transfer Module
Available to: Any
Energy Drainage: 15
Cool Down Rate: 10 Seconds
Minimum Range: 0 GU
Maximun Range: 150 Range
Description: Energy Transfer Module allows for a you to transfer your own energy to a ally.
[ This Message was edited by: Alanstar on 2010-07-22 02:04 ]
_________________
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-15 01:06
Those are nice, heres one I put up a while back.
Ion Gun:
In an effort to regain the power of the Particle Cannon that was lost in a massive explosion on Exertha, ICC scientists have finally come up with such a weapon.
Ion Gun
Range: 1.1k gu
Energy Cost: 1.5x energy cost of the current Particle Cannon
Ammo: Unlimited, ammo is created by the drives of the ship.
Damage type: Energy
Damage: Same as Railgun, but with fall off after 900gu.
Same animation as the Ion Cannon, but only fires 1 shot. This wep would bring to ICC players, a choice. Have unlimited ammo for a cost in overall max combat speed (slower speeds to keep energy up) or have limited ammo for the cost of better speed and maneuverability. Equipping the Ion Gun would limit you to the point of not being able to peruse the enemy, as once your energy is gone, so too is your ability to fight. This was the same issue ICC had back pre 1.5 when we had particle cannons as something we normally could build and equip from factory's and starports. Mixing railguns and Ion guns would only give you a small advantage, as once you ran out of energy, only your railguns would be working. Even then only till you had ammo left.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
NoBoDx
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 14, 2003
Posts: 784
From: Germany / NRW
| Posted: 2010-07-15 02:48
Ion Cannon
Beam-Type for special ship
no fireing arc (just shooting where the ship is pointing)
high damage
max range 500gu
min range 0gu
usable without a target
able to sweep over the battelfield
(for those, who know it -> Homeworld Ion-Frigatte)
http://shipyards.relicnews.com/hw2/images/display.htm?demo_091303_28.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: NoBoDx on 2010-07-15 04:24 ]
_________________
The only good 'ooman is a dead 'ooman. An' da only fing better than a dead 'ooman'z a dyin' 'ooman who tell you where ter find 'is mates.
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-15 04:37
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-15 02:48, NoBoDx wrote:
Ion Cannon
Beam-Type for special ship
no fireing arc (just shooting where the ship is pointing)
high damage
max range 500gu
min range 0gu
usable without a target
able to sweep over the battelfield
(for those, who know it -> Homeworld Ion-Frigatte)
http://shipyards.relicnews.com/hw2/images/display.htm?demo_091303_28.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: NoBoDx on 2010-07-15 04:24 ]
|
|
I was avoiding suggesting such a thing, as many games have Ion Cannons that are beam weps.
Most notably the Command and Conquer games, GDI having there Ion Cannon.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
NoBoDx
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 14, 2003
Posts: 784
From: Germany / NRW
| Posted: 2010-07-15 05:39
or give it another name, but i'd like to see such weapons in ds 
*i didnt ment a ion-cannon similar to C & C*
[ This Message was edited by: NoBoDx on 2010-07-15 06:21 ]
_________________
The only good 'ooman is a dead 'ooman. An' da only fing better than a dead 'ooman'z a dyin' 'ooman who tell you where ter find 'is mates.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2010-07-15 10:47
I find it amusing that people make a distinction between ion cannons and particle cannons when they're pretty much the same thing. Unless you have a neutral-particle cannon, of course but that's basically a charged-particle cannon that adds oppositely-charged ions at the point of firing.
On the the reviews:
Quote:
| Particle Mass Driver |
|
Basically a Gauss Gun or whatever they call it, except with a crippling minimum range for some reason and what looks like a ludicrous fire rate.
Quote:
| Condensed Particle Mass Driver |
|
Basically a heavy Gauss Gun; see above.
Quote:
| Stasis Impulse Disrupter[sic] |
|
This is mildly interesting, as much as it appears to have been inspired by EVE. Would probably use it as one of the Command Dreadnaught's command widget bonus-thingies.
Quote:
| Weapon System Disrupter[sic] |
|
Another one from EVE. I hope that's a typo, because giving any device (bar jumpdrives and such) a range of 800,000GU is probably a bad idea.
The problem with this is that it's either useless or ridiculously overpowered. Five seconds isn't really all that much time to have all your guns disabled, particularly if the jammer had to cool down for an entire minute. But increasing the duration or decreasing the recharge time would open things up to a handful of electronic warfare ships completely gimping an enemy ship, setting it up to be horribly killed with ease by an allied ship. Particularly if all of those ewar ships had the slowdown thingy above to prevent them from escaping an interdictor.
ECCM and/or scanner. Unless you mean it makes other ships somehow more easily seen even when they've not got a diamond over them, which becomes a bit illogical if you think about how if you can detect them optically (i.e. see them), you can target them (i.e. they get a diamond on them). Presumably ECM disrupts optical target acquisition in some way.
Quote:
| Emission Reduction Values |
|
ECM. Unless you mean it makes people less easily seen visually (see the comments in my above paragraph), in which case you're looking for the cloaking device.
Incidentally, in reality there is no stealth in space mostly because spacecraft would be as easily detected as large, red-hot iron spheres in the middle of the Arctic, at night, from a helicopter with sensitive cameras and thermal imaging equipment.
The main issue I have with this is that it basically doesn't fit in with the design philosophy of ICC using long-range, energy-efficient projectile weapons. Instead it's basically a railgun that has infinite ammo (at the expense of energy, which the ICC have oodles of) and deals a completely different type of damage compared to most ICC ranged weapons, thus making it an excellent weapon for fighting UGTO because they wouldn't be able to specialise their armour types to counter both missiles and energy weapons.
I would cite the fact that fitting particle cannons on escort destroyers was one reason why ICC were godlike in .483, but the above suggested weapon isn't really a particle cannon equivalent since it lacks the crippling falloff.
1: This would probably be a k'luth weapon if anything.
2: It would be horrible to balance since either a glancing hit would do nothing or a solid hit would become a horrible incineration ray.
3: I don't think it would really add much to the depth of gameplay, since we already have ships that have the job of getting as close to the enemy as possible whilst facing them and zapping them to death, which is basically what you'd need to do with this weapon.
---
The astute amongst you might notice that the general theme of my responses here is that you should think about what new and interesting tactics your new gadget would introduce, rather than just coming up with endless variants on the same theme (the particle mass driver) or trying to negate a particular faction's flaws (the ion gun).
Consider: The game "Doom" by ID software had a plethora of guns (for its time; it had nine). But crucially they all did different things. The pistol was your backup weapon for which you'd probably always have ammo, but it was also accurate, the chaingun spat out huge amounts of bullets that slowly chewed enemies to death, the shotgun did lots of damage at close range and could hit multiple targets at a distance... The list goes on.
We want weapons like that. Weapons that have highly distinct properties that have uses in different situations and use different tactics.
We don't want, say, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare weapons, where you have about a billion assault rifles to choose from that basically do the same thing. That just leads to more time spent working on variants of the same thing, rather than time spent working on something new and exciting.
So:
If you're thinking about suggesting a weapon or device, here are a few (unofficial) guidelines:
1: Is it actually new and different? If you can describe your gadget as "it's like a [something that already exists], except..." then you should probably think carefully about whether it's going to be worthwhile. This isn't necessarily a killer (the different kinds of missiles are essentially similar but with different performance envelopes, for example), but remember to keep it in mind.
2: Where does it fit? If it fits into a current weapon class (and can therefore be used to substitute for another weapon) then it'll be a lot easier to work with than a device that belongs in a class of its own (and would therefore necessitate an entirely new ship layout just for that gadget). Similarly, don't make a weapon that treads on another classes' turf. A really slow-moving, unguided missile would basically be a torpedo-type weapon for example.
3: Does it fit with the faction's design philosophy? Gadgets should fit with the target faction's "theme": ICC have lots of ranged weapons and are nimble, UGTO are heavy bruisers with limited staying power, and K'luth are fragile but have cloaking and use ambush tactics.
4: Put it in context. Consider that ships have more than one gadget, and players will attempt to combine them together for more powerful combinations. This can be intentional, but disasters can occur if it's not considered.
Examples: A new, super-effcient ICC shield that charges really quickly and for almost no energy cost, but it has a really low maximum HP. Sounds interesting, right? But wait! Combine it with a normal shield and you can just constantly transfer from the fast-charger into the normal shield, making you nigh-invulnerable.
Or the above-mentioned ion cannon combined with the old tractor beam that locked targets place.
5: What new tactics does it introduce? This is possibly the most important point. What does this gadget do that other gadgets don't?
For example, the UGTO can swap between the particle cannon and the EMP cannon. The particle cannon just makes things die, BUT the EMP cannon introduces a new factor: You can disable a ship with it, preventing it from escaping or fighting back whilst you kill it at your leisure.
Or the ICC railgun/gauss cannon. The railgun does more damage over time, but with the gauss cannon you can snipe people from a much greater distance.
6: Don't bother with specific numbers much. You're making a pitch for a new and interesting gadget to see if it's worth taking the time to put some numbers on it (which will inevitably change during testing anyway). If you're going to compare you gadget with something else, just say it's "more than" or "less than" or "equal to".
For example: Defence mode for ICC shields: This will make ICC shields regenerate a whole bunch faster, but will take up more energy and be less efficient than normal. It can be toggled on and off.
Gauss gun: A long-range sniping weapon with more range, velocity and damage than the railgun, but a sufficiently slow fire rate that the railgun will do more damage over time at shorter ranges where it can hit.
That's about all I can think of, at the moment. Thank you for reading.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Red October
Fleet Admiral
Joined: May 30, 2010
Posts: 165
From: Stillwater, Oklahoma
| Posted: 2010-07-15 11:05
Gejaheline, that was a typo. Values can easily be adjusted, but I am just bringing new and interesting ideas to the game.
_________________
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2010-07-15 13:05
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-15 10:47, Gejaheline wrote:
I find it amusing that people make a distinction between ion cannons and particle cannons when they're pretty much the same thing. Unless you have a neutral-particle cannon, of course but that's basically a charged-particle cannon that adds oppositely-charged ions at the point of firing.
|
|
Or when they consider the "standard" beam ion cannon as an energy weapon, like in the Homeworld games. They'd do kinetic damage if anything, particle beams would be cutting pieces off ships as opposed to melting holes through them like an actual energy based weapon like Lasers would do. The only time I can remember seeing realistically portrayed particle beams is in Babylon 5.
Quote:
|
The main issue I have with this is that it basically doesn't fit in with the design philosophy of ICC using long-range, energy-efficient projectile weapons.
|
|
That reminds me of something, energy use on Gauss is HORRIBLE, it's something along the lines of 5x the energy use of Rails.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
NoBoDx
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 14, 2003
Posts: 784
From: Germany / NRW
| Posted: 2010-07-15 16:48
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-15 10:47, Gejaheline wrote:
1: This would probably be a k'luth weapon if anything.
2: It would be horrible to balance since either a glancing hit would do nothing or a solid hit would become a horrible incineration ray.
3: I don't think it would really add much to the depth of gameplay, since we already have ships that have the job of getting as close to the enemy as possible whilst facing them and zapping them to death, which is basically what you'd need to do with this weapon.
|
|
i like my ion cannon
i dont think it would be that horrible to balance
remember, its a weapon without a fireing itself
the fireing-arc (and therefore balancing) is defined by the turn rate of the ship wielding that gun
-> if its a slow turning one (dread / station) it would be difficult to keep anything smaller in the beam -> station-killer
-> if you sweep over the battle-field, friendlys would be in same danger than enemys
hm but a ship with on beam into each direction, turning, would loog awsome =P
_________________
The only good 'ooman is a dead 'ooman. An' da only fing better than a dead 'ooman'z a dyin' 'ooman who tell you where ter find 'is mates.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2010-07-15 19:17
Allow me to explain in a bit more detail:
A giant, un-aimable beam would not be able to be both effective when "swept" AND when held on an enemy target. If the beam could deal enough damage when sweeping across a target (which would take probably a fraction of a second or so in most combat situations) that it would be noticeable, then holding that beam on a single target would deal damage at a truly huge rate. If the beam dealt a reasonable amount of damage when held on a target, it would deal basically nothing when sweeping. One or the other.
Also, you'd basically have to design an entire ship variant specifically for this weapon.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-15 21:39
The basis of the Ion Gun was to give back the Particle cannon back to ICC. Also bringing with it the same energy issues ICC had back then, and no ICC doesn't have oodles of energy. In fact we gotta be careful of our energy when moving about the battlefield. The gauss is a prime example of this, it consumes a lot of energy compared to the railgun. This in of itself brings issues when flying around trying to doge things. Ships like the combat dessy and HC both can't use gauss and fly at top speeds (best for dodging), while keeping up energy. If said ships used the ion gun with its big energy drain, they wouldn't be able to use it for long, or would have to use lower speeds. Much like how ICC had to back in the day.
As for the fall off, it would be massive on the last 200-300gu. To the point of 1/4th the damage, so going from full to 1/4th in that last stretch would bring it in line with the Pcannon. Would represent the fact that this is a small version of the Ion Cannon, unable to sustain its full damage all the way out to its max range.
UGTO defending against this? They have reflective and ablative, and just plain normal armor too. This is no different then an assault dread having Ion cannons and Torpedoes (kinetic damage) and lots of HCL and CL's. No UGTO armor can defend against both of those that come from that ship, so when fighting ICC most uggies use standered armor. If there is a missile spam they pull out ships that already have ablative mounted. In fact I see very little Reflective armor used by the UGTO, since its useless even against the Kluth that also have both Kenetic and Energy type weps too.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2010-07-16 03:53
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-15 21:39, Starcommand of ICC *XO* wrote:
The basis of the Ion Gun was to give back the Particle cannon back to ICC.
|
|
Would you also propose giving the railgun to the UGTO, then? What puts me off this suggestion the most is the fact that we removed cross-faction modding for a reason, and it raises spectres of ships similar to the escort destroyer armed with nothing but pcannons, which was never intended to see the light of day.
Quote:
|
In fact I see very little Reflective armor used by the UGTO, since its useless even against the Kluth that also have both Kenetic and Energy type weps too. |
|
I, personally, regularly use reflective armour against k'luth because it's effective against virtually all of their weapons, particularly their main damage dealers: beams and core weapons.
When you say that specialised armour is useless against ICC, I notice you mention a ship class that is notable for being the exception from the norm with ICC in that it has a heavy mixture of both kinds of weapons: Most ICC ships use railguns and missiles, if memory serves.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2010-07-16 15:17
i like new ideas, not ideas "borrowed" from eve
look:
modding- not copying
modding with different res- still not copying
modding with res, powergrid,and cpu- pushing it
modding with res,power grid, cpu, and blueprints- makes the new player go: oh look its an eve ripoff
same with borrowing devices from eve
_________________
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-07-16 15:37
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-16 03:53, Gejaheline wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-07-15 21:39, Starcommand of ICC *XO* wrote:
The basis of the Ion Gun was to give back the Particle cannon back to ICC.
|
|
Would you also propose giving the railgun to the UGTO, then? What puts me off this suggestion the most is the fact that we removed cross-faction modding for a reason, and it raises spectres of ships similar to the escort destroyer armed with nothing but pcannons, which was never intended to see the light of day.
|
|
ICC had the particle cannon as something we normally could make from factories, it was NOT stolen tech. The free mod system is GONE, no swapping out beams for cannons, so your fear there of the old ED is poorly based. UGTO with a ammo based gun? They too had railguns they could make, but the Pcannon was king back then so you hardly saw an uggie with railguns. Reason ICC and UGTO had the same weps were, ICC was the rebel faction, so it would stand to reason they too had the same weps as UGTO.
Quantum Cannon: UGTO
Range: 600-800
Ammo: 30 + 2 per level
Damage: 1.5x pcannon + same as pcannon per level
Fall off: none
Travel Speed: Same as QST
Rate of Fire: 2 shots, reload 1.5x longer then the pcannon.
UGTO scientists have come up with a smaller version of the QST. Using the same basis as the QST, they have come up with a 2 shot cannon.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
