Terrain Elevation, Eyesight, and weapons fire simulation

Ledarsi seems to have hit just about every flavor of weapon imaginable.

The tricky part is creating the mechanics that make them work.

Corrosive weapons are just DoT. In which case you could just use an EMG or gatling gun of appropriate size. However I do like the idea of EMP weapons that disable units.

Does anyone else remember getting a Krogoth with one or two spider bots back in the day and then watching the helpless Krogoth get slowly taken apart by a swarm of small cheap units?

Indeed, I click here for simple question which seems to be related to the current topic.

Does already (or will ever) elevation affect the range of fire and/or LoS?

In that ranges are spherical, yes.

Radar doesn't go through rock.

EM waves bounce off the ionosphere.

That's how commercial shipping can see several hundred kilometers.

Corrosive weapons do damage over time after the firing unit is dead.

aren't they already simulated?

Check the post date

The munitions could be more interesting and dynamic, but that is also a consumption of development time.

The terrain already unintentionally seems to allow for blindspots in firing arcs, like pelters hitting hills and even pelters hitting the front of hills where targets are on and thus missing constantly.

Ask for it reacting more to terrain in terms of increased range on top of hills and such, it is very very difficult. the game randomly generates hills often, and procuring hills would be a players responsibility but it might also balance in favor for one or another player.

On top of that the game already supports straight fire or arc weapons but the maps do not yet have features that generate that are very extreme, such as huge hills or huge cliff edges or plateaus, so it is hard to see any terrain features that promote good hill advantage or bad hill advantage (possibly except for craters, they are obviously poor altitude choices)

I always wondered what the game would look like if "ranges" for things were shown by a "3d" area much like "orbital shell", except they also added range modifiers for height advantage so that "shell" would shrink or grow and would show it being blocked by terrain and such too, so you would get an odd 3d transparent shape around units showing their range.

That is very labor intensive as far as development, maybe that is a future feature or mod feature we will see...

...Also, this is hand in hand with another topic about "why do units have capped ranges instead of damage falloff and visual range?". In that thread, it is suggested that turrets should fire past their range if fired upon but with damage falloff (hitting a sheller doing 10% damage). If that was the case the fire ranges can be represented by an effective range and a max range, or even a range gradient where the transparency shows the damage/accuracy for that range. THIS IDEA would make the game more complex as well, but also would be greatly intensive in development time.

Getting the game working would be a nice start. That requires features much more necessary than suggestions to add depth to combat, like control features and lobby structure.

Yeah.

I've found some planet seeds where there are significant unit advantages (4 ants beating 4 levellers) because of hills.

But they aren't obvious unless you get lucky or free cam it.

I know this post is rather old, but the underlined sentence in the quote is something I really wanted to hit on. I do not consider it "breaking the game" if a unit firing uphill cannot shoot at its normal range. Isn't that the entire idea behind making terrain matter strategically? If two identical armies fight, and one is uphill and the other downhill, the uphill army should be able to fire farther and engage first.