Weapon Range and cost

[EMapper]

I have been playing for a while now and have settled into using a fusion laser and an icespear cannon. Something has been bugging me about that. Why is the least expensive weapon the most valuable. By valuable I mean longer ranged. It doesn't make sense to me. If you have a more powerful gun it should shoot further. I understand that there are "game play" issues involved but it seems that as you get more into the game and progress to better stuff, the guns should too. It seems to me that you pay more for a crappier guns. Laser and frames don't work this way. I don't hate it or anything I was just wondering what the thinking was at design phase.

Thanks for the Evoniverse.

[SeeJay]

It's a balance. More punch in damage doesn't have to have longer range to do that.

I also used the IceSpear for a long time but now, when you have the weapons lab, you can craft much
better weapons yourself. Balance range/yield etc so it fits your combat style.
I like when there is a kinetic effect that slaps my foe's around a bit!

[Vice]

Why is the least expensive weapon the most valuable.

Largely because the idea of 'valuable' is subjective. What is important to you may not be to someone else, and various gameplay design attributes can reflect this difference of opinion among the players. A number of them have requested certain attributes be unique to certain types of weapons, range and yield being two of those. Rather than having everything scale up to be 'super ship', 'super weapon', and 'super equipment' that every player eventually winds up with, many in-game elements offer unique benefits over the others in an effort to help balance gameplay and the results of putting players with varying configurations of ships, weapons, and equipment together and still have a reasonable level of fair gameplay (and in the realm of weapons, this obviously relates specifically to combat).

With that said though, the unique attributes of certain weapon types will provide benefits that can be best exploited in certain situations. For example, if you want a high flash/yield weapon that burns out quicker (ie shorter range), you can create or buy one and use it for close range strike attack missions on bigger targets (ie capital ships) that a longer range, slower burning, lower yield weapon might not be so good at inflicting as much damage with, especially when combined with other weapon types and equipment that those weapons work best with. The point is, there are conditions that are integrated into the design that attempt to limit the 'super ship' concern a number of players expressed over the years. There are particular combinations that are optimal for combat, exploration, resource recovery, and trade, but the varied benefit templates items offer are, at least in part, designed to facilitate some balance and unique configuration benefits that don't eliminate others.

[EMapper]

Thanks for the info. I have now move up to a cmdr in mil rank. I have created a few stations. New question, does the "heat map" showing economy show updates that I cause? Have put a bunch of station in the saphire area (trade, build, ore processing, and energy production). Also is there a guild to the weapons lab? I have made a couple of new guns that seem to be better than an icepear.

Thanks again for this rich universe

[Rubber Chicken]

The economy map is static. Maybe this will change in the future.

The custom weapons are generally more energy efficient than stock offerings. They also have other range/damage output advantages over most of the medium to high power stock weapons as well. That said, there really is no 'magic bullet' weapon. Some combinations of particle/beam cannons are better than others - depending on the slider settings you use. As Vice stated, depending on your flying style, you may find a combo that works best for you with some experimentation.

Most PvP players prefer to use longer range, higher rate of fire weapons with as much punch as they can get without sacrificing the first two factors.

If however you are interested more anti-AI/single player combat then the sky's the limit. Any combo you find that does the job, and does it best for your fighting style, is the one for you.

[DaveK]

Also is there a guild to the weapons lab? I have made a couple of new guns that seem to be better than an icepear.

Thanks again for this rich universe

If you mean guide, then you can download . . .

The Hints&Tips Guide (beware of spoilers)

and/or

The Evochron Mercenaries Technical Guide

Both have info, advice and technical data about the Weapons Lab (and lots and lots of other things!!)

[DennyMala]

I'm rather sure I posted something here... and it's no longer there... oh well, re-doing it.

Long story short (condensed version of previous post attempt) to enhance balance and have a significant difference between power and range (right now it's a very small amount of time difference between when you can open fire in a headon encouter with an enemy) I'll gladly see all ranges multiplied by 2 to better scale with the game size of things and to have a doubled range difference that will allow a clear advantage to less powerful weapons but longer firing.

This will be beneficial to TWs too that now need to find a structure to climb or some mountains to engage flying targets.

[DaveK]

I'm rather sure I posted something here... and it's no longer there... oh well, re-doing it.

Long story short (condensed version of previous post attempt) to enhance balance and have a significant difference between power and range (right now it's a very small amount of time difference between when you can open fire in a headon encouter with an enemy) I'll gladly see all ranges multiplied by 2 to better scale with the game size of things and to have a doubled range difference that will allow a clear advantage to less powerful weapons but longer firing.

This will be beneficial to TWs too that now need to find a structure to climb or some mountains to engage flying targets.

I've always been in favour of longer ranges (even at the expense of damage) I'm not a 'close up and personal' sort of guy when it involves people who are trying to kill me!:P

If weapons do get a makeover can I have Excaliburs that can be launched as 1x8 and 2x4 and 4x2? It's number one on my Christmas wish list to Father Christmas

[DennyMala]

I guess excals are nerfed on purpose to avoind being an uber weapon (and we all use them basically so it's not nerf enough...lol) so I doubt Vice will go into that, but you can always hope for it.

[DaveK]

I guess excals are nerfed on purpose to avoind being an uber weapon (and we all use them basically so it's not nerf enough...lol) so I doubt Vice will go into that, but you can always hope for it.

I've been hoping since Legends. A month after I bought the game and had just about made enough to buy the instant reloading Excal, by 'popular demand' Vice changed it to the 3 minute reload, so I never got the chance to missile spam!

On a more serious note, for explorers and traders I think that a modification of the all or nothing approach would actually improve the Excal without making it too powerful, just more versatile

[SeeJay]

The Excal isn't as powerful as people think. Eight missiles are not to hard to shoot down, even if they are close to each other. (That actually makes it easier)
The impact if you miss some of them isn't to bad either since they are weak compared to other missiles. I never use them!

I use other missiles and can "spam" with quick releases if I want. Much more effective against both AI and Human targets!;)

[EPICTHEFAIL]

Speaking of mismatched firepower and price, the game really has no idea how to price the Weapon Lab weapons. A railgun that hits for 79 at 780 meters and takes about a minute to empty the capacitors when firing with the beams sells for ~3500 in Alpha Centauri. The Maxim-R that it replaced sold for about 120000. It doesn`t seem to have anything to do with the cost of the raw materials. Could anyone explain this to me?

[Marvin]

Yeah ... supply and demand. The Maxim is a better cannon and, consequently, more veteran mercenaries use it.

[-splosives-]

Why is the least expensive weapon the most valuable.

Largely because the idea of 'valuable' is subjective. What is important to you may not be to someone else, and various gameplay design attributes can reflect this difference of opinion among the players. A number of them have requested certain attributes be unique to certain types of weapons, range and yield being two of those. Rather than having everything scale up to be 'super ship', 'super weapon', and 'super equipment' that every player eventually winds up with, many in-game elements offer unique benefits over the others in an effort to help balance gameplay and the results of putting players with varying configurations of ships, weapons, and equipment together and still have a reasonable level of fair gameplay (and in the realm of weapons, this obviously relates specifically to combat).

With that said though, the unique attributes of certain weapon types will provide benefits that can be best exploited in certain situations. For example, if you want a high flash/yield weapon that burns out quicker (ie shorter range), you can create or buy one and use it for close range strike attack missions on bigger targets (ie capital ships) that a longer range, slower burning, lower yield weapon might not be so good at inflicting as much damage with, especially when combined with other weapon types and equipment that those weapons work best with. The point is, there are conditions that are integrated into the design that attempt to limit the 'super ship' concern a number of players expressed over the years. There are particular combinations that are optimal for combat, exploration, resource recovery, and trade, but the varied benefit templates items offer are, at least in part, designed to facilitate some balance and unique configuration benefits that don't eliminate others.

The problem with this is that range is far too valuable compared to yield. With short range, you can't stay close long enough to do any damage because the afterburner power is too weak for that. A solution would be to go slower, but you'd be a sitting duck for other enemies that way. That's why everyone uses the high range weapons.
It's a well intended balance feature, but it just doesn't turn out to be balanced at all.

[Rubber Chicken]

..... A solution would be to go slower, but you'd be a sitting duck for other enemies that way. That's why everyone uses the high range weapons.
It's a well intended balance feature, but it just doesn't turn out to be balanced at all.

I do agree that hardly anyone with experience uses the lower-range weapons outside of SP, and I too would like to see a little more afterburner power. But... if everybody has better afterburners, then the situation will still be the inability to close the distance - just at higher speeds.

A better solution would be to actually learn how to turn your ship in different directions quickly and efficiently until you CAN get the shot. You told yourself once... "It's all about flight path."

[Capt_Caveman]

Speaking of mismatched firepower and price, the game really has no idea how to price the Weapon Lab weapons. A railgun that hits for 79 at 780 meters and takes about a minute to empty the capacitors when firing with the beams sells for ~3500 in Alpha Centauri. The Maxim-R that it replaced sold for about 120000. It doesn`t seem to have anything to do with the cost of the raw materials. Could anyone explain this to me?

keep in mind, YOU supply the lab with materials, the lab only charges you to assemble the weapon.
so custom weapons appear cheaper.

the lab does not care where you got the materials or how much you paid.

[-splosives-]

..... A solution would be to go slower, but you'd be a sitting duck for other enemies that way. That's why everyone uses the high range weapons.
It's a well intended balance feature, but it just doesn't turn out to be balanced at all.

I do agree that hardly anyone with experience uses the lower-range weapons outside of SP, and I too would like to see a little more afterburner power. But... if everybody has better afterburners, then the situation will still be the inability to close the distance - just at higher speeds.

A better solution would be to actually learn how to turn your ship in different directions quickly and efficiently until you CAN get the shot. You told yourself once... "It's all about flight path."

You can only turn your ship as fast as your afterburner lets you.

[Rubber Chicken]

Actually you can only turn your ship as fast as your base agility + your wing system + your afterburner will let you.

[Marvin]

Actually you can only turn your ship as fast as your base agility + your wing system + your afterburner will let you.

I wonder if there's a difference between the turn rate when using a joystick vs. a mouse.

[DaveK]

Actually you can only turn your ship as fast as your base agility + your wing system + your afterburner will let you.

I wonder if there's a difference between the turn rate when using a joystick vs. a mouse.

Sounds like an opportunity for experimental research!

[Rubber Chicken]

It's possible. I use stick. I've found that having the in-game sensitivity and stick profiler sensitivity up as high as I can stand + deadzone as low as feasible has really helped. I use a custom deadzone setting in the sw.cfg file (line 12 IIRC) of less than default deadzone setting of 1 - represented as value 100 in the file. I think I set the value to 45 or something like that...

I've found turning on axis is improved as well as a bit better response when taking heavy fire. (Lessened chance of pulling the gun sight way past the target when the ship finally starts to resist the kinetic force.)

Using the HVVM + FPM together (settable in the HUD options), knowing which is which, and understanding what the HVVM and FPM's respective purposes are, will help you read your ship's orientation - aiding you in judging what must be done to put the ship where you want it quickly and efficiently.
It also helps at times to utilize the mouse look or padlock-to-target mode to the full extent the hud will still display these markers to get a good read on your ship current flight path as well. Looking straight ahead all the time (in cockpit view) is like having horse blinders on.

[Edited on 1-4-2014 by Rubber Chicken]

[Vice]

Guess this topic has drifted from the original.

The limits of control input are static for all control modes. The rate at which those limits can be reached can vary depending on deadzone and sensitivity settings available for both joystick and mouse control input. For keyboard input, the game uses a fixed rate of inclination and declination for the static on/off input required for a keyboard. But for variable control input (mouse and joystick), the player can adjust the response range (from center) and the reaction rate to their personal preference.

In fact, the mouse system actually uses the joystick system. The values from the mouse, whether the directional or positional control mode, are ported over to the joystick control system. That's why the behavior is identical in terms of limits and input levels. That's also why they can even share the same deadzone and sensitivity settings. Likewise, even input from the keyboard is ported over to the joystick control system. So technically all control modes are using the same joystick input system, just in the different ways the signals are taken from a selected input device and transferred over to the joystick system. The caps, centers, and ranges are applied the same for all of them, subject to the inherent variability of each device (ie one joystick can behave differently from another).

Of course, other factors will apply for the overall limits of rotation, including wing and thruster system and mass of the ship.

[-splosives-]

Actually you can only turn your ship as fast as your base agility + your wing system + your afterburner will let you.

I don't mean turn rate, I mean a change of flight path. fastest way to make a curve is to boost towards the center point of the curve with your afterburner.

[Rubber Chicken]

^

So did I.