Artillery Accuracy

How do you know that there are none? Happen to know all the plans for PA release? Care to give some more of this behind-the-screen info?

Do we have any evidence of this? The trailer depicted a duel map that was mentioned in the TotalBiscuit interview to be based on an 8km by 8km square map, which is roughly the size of duel maps in TA/SC. I don't think there's much benefit from having maps significantly larger than the 81x81 maps of SC without seriously retooling the way the game's economy works.

What was this, if not a cruise missile? Also tactical missiles were basically SRBMs (emphasis on the S there, since no self-respecting real world ballistic missile would have a range of less than ten kilometres).

I'm not sure why people keep saying this. Weren't the two most popular maps in SC Fields of Isis and Seton's Clutch? Which were basically two chokepoints.

Sorry, totally forgott about that unit

As for the maps, the chokepoints in those maps where the reason why they were so popular, but those maps were quite unique in those terms.

Do we have any evidence of this? The trailer depicted a duel map that was mentioned in the TotalBiscuit interview to be based on an 8km by 8km square map, which is roughly the size of duel maps in TA/SC. I don't think there's much benefit from having maps significantly larger than the 81x81 maps of SC without seriously retooling the way the game's economy works.

viewtopic.php?p=510915#p510915

You're forgetting that a 'planetary' map effectively halves the playable area, since you can get to the enemy by both directions. If you wrapped a normal map around the sphere it'd have both player bases next to each other. You'd have to reposition one of the bases to the midpoint of the 'standard' map, so instead of, say, 8km between bases, it'd be 4km in each direction.

The playable AREA is the same, but unless you're fully exploiting the 360 degree freedom of the sphere, you're only getting half the map. Which is why the one in the concept video seems unusually small.

That means the engine supports maps that big. What matters is what sizes the game will be tested and balanced on, what sizes are used in competition play, and what sizes the AI is programmed to handle, which isn't mentioned.

If the game can handle worlds that large, and maps are procedural we can at least assume a very varied experience all around. I'd have to say artillery will not scale well for every playing field, and I actually think it shouldn't. Some planets will simply not be arty friendly, so use other means. The planets that are arty friendly should allow artillery to act as it's intended, powerfull indirect fire. Missiles could also be used as others have mentioned for actual precise fire, though I personally think their range should be greater than it has been in sup com, but make them require forward observers. Perhaps limit all arty to have to fire on location with direct los from a spotting unit within the past x amount of time? otherwise they recieve a reduced accuracy (to the point of ridiculously off target, probably only usefull to fire into the middle of where you think the enemy base is) Any unit could "spot" but the LOS needs to be direct, no firing arty on radar blips (or make radar blips more general, such as being a wide area of "there are units here, but you don't know exactly where")

thes shells are in a perfectly stable orbit around the center of gravity of the planet.. unfrotuantly there happens to be a PLANET in their path!

Not being able to fire unless there is direct LOS is kind of unrealistic, since humanity is already capable of this. (Not really a grand feat tbh) It's simple mathematics... I want to fire there, this means the shell has to move this distance in that direction. *Calculates* *Aims* FIRE!

The devs have already stated they want to build an engine with no real limitations, the only limitations are performance of current hardware. If your PC doubles in speed, they want you to be able to double your planet's or system's size as well.

W-w-wait... Really?

So, theoretically, I could play a skirmish game with a quintillion planets of 999 by 999 kilometers?

Where's my quantum computer! I want to play this never-ending game... The Infinite War!

Eventually, you'll run into 64-bit addressing limitations. So no, not quintillions, just "A Lot."

I have no idea what that is, but when we get to the next 'thing' (32 bits, 64 bits, et cetera) or whatever, it ought to be possible I guess?

My point was mainly that there is no 'in game limit'. Literally none. That it'd all depend on the PC you use.

Thát's awesome, and something more (if not all) games should do.

32bits = 2^32 = ~4.3 billion addresses.
Simply speaking it's good for 4Gb RAM.

64bit = 2^64 = ~18 billion billion addresses!
18,000,000,000 Gb RAM should keep us going for a while...

. . .

That is... Quite a lot.

Interesting though; thank you for the explanation!

Based on SUPCOM:

The problem I found in artillery was that the entry level stuff was useless, Mobile artillery was useful in a mixed assault squad but the basic structure artillery was just useless as the range was so small and the accuracy was still aweful. it was to simple to just close the gap.

Shorter range, smaller aoe artillery needs less spread on its fire to be considered useful.

Basic T1 mobile arty is mainly used for taking out early point defenses that the other combat units can't handle, the arty simply out-ranges it

And I agree, I find it very difficult to find a use for mid-level artillery sometimes. The only real applications are defense against either large armies that can be spammed with inaccurate shells, or using that fact that it does a lot of damage to use them on experimentals if you build enough of them.

T2 fixed artillery was great (unless you were Cybran), you were just using it wrong. It's not a defensive weapon. You stick it in a firebase on 10km maps and shell enemy bases with it. And then FA happened and TMLs got a massive buff, making them less useful.