Terket Decreasing range for shorter railguns would make them even more useless than they already are. Rails with 0-3 accelerators are already pretty pointless.
Terket after hitting 300 range it starts to lose it's speed and power until it reaches unbuffed velocity and damage.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that if you reach range 300, adding more accelerators will actually make it weaker?
Tobi-wan_Kenobi No, if it hits 300, it will decrease. (This explanation sounded good in my head) Basically 300 is the default range right now.
5000 accelerators and it would still be 300.
This idea suggests that bullets could have 300 as optimal range and then it would slowly fade to unbuffed and then disappear.
Terket Ohhh- you're saying that once the SHOT hits 300 range, it will begin to lose damage and speed as it travels. Okay that makes more sense. I mean, not from a physics standpoint, but Cosmoteer already compromises on physics in some places.
This would be a huge buff to rails though, increasing their range.
The main problem with extending railgun range past 300 is that then there will be a single longest-range weapon which generally reduces the number of interesting strategies and makes kiting more of a problem.
My explanation towards the weapon's fixed range is that they are determined by their "accuracy" rather than by their "projectile speed", since there is no air resistance in space everything can travel indefinitely, they just have to not miss their target (from the z-axis). This bears the question of how the rail gun have better range than most of the other weapons, as in reality a spinal-mounted, fix-angled weapon should be more difficult to aim compared to turret-based weapons. I guess it's just more intuitive since most people are accustomed to how things work in atmosphere.
I do think there should be a limit, but it should be increased. Some railguns can barely fire out of the gun, which then would optimize small, 4 accelerator ships. Maybe the range can be increased to 340.
Walt From my recent experience on the multiplayer, I will say it's fine to give the rail gun different ranges based on its buff status. As different ranges allow for more diversity in ship design. You can go for a brawler with multiple short-ranged rail guns, or a sniper with one or two long-ranged rail guns. However, this would mean that the base range, or even the buffering curve of the rail gun have to be readjusted in order to keep the balance. As for the kiting issue, I don't think it will matter due to the fact that the rail gun weights much more than the other weapons. If ships have decent amount of thrusters they should have no trouble in catching up with the kiters.
Walt well auto-firing missiles is also a thing and it certainly is a problem rn,as rails being marked as a "anti-kite" weapon,it should have more range or atleast allow the auto-fired shot to outrange the missiles,not the opposite
(idk if the update with pd and missiles would utterly banish missile kite walls but having the player to micromanage rail shots and outplay the enemy certainly would add abit more depth to MP instead of just setting the ship to maximum range and let the AI do all the work) (perhaps also nerf the knockback of railshots so the receiving end can chase the attacker,not having its huge thrusters disrupted every time a railshot connects)
(so my proposal is,just like the above suggestion,allow railgun shots to break the 300 unit range barrier,but the effective range shown will still be 300 unit (or less if less accelerator is installed) so the AI won't automatically retreat in normal tournament and the outrange mechanic can only be used in MP,where all the missile kiters are)
Atarlost I've seen similar comments so I'll say this is purely a wrong perception. All weapons are kite weapons for a very simple reason. No matter what stats they have a kite has the range advantage as it's being chased. Because its shots have a far shorter distance to cover while the chaser closes the that distance. On the other hand the chaser's shots have to go further than the distance as both ships move on.
Now the most ranged weapon (like the railgun) is the best anti-kite weapon because of range and shot speed, hence, counters the disadvantage the most. Simple as that.
Lafiel I've seen similar comments so I'll say this is purely a wrong perception. All weapons are kite weapons for a very simple reason. No matter what stats they have a kite has the range advantage as it's being chased. Because its shots have a far shorter distance to cover while the chaser closes the that distance. On the other hand the chaser's shots have to go further than the distance as both ships move on.
Now the most ranged weapon (like the railgun) is the best anti-kite weapon because of range and shot speed, hence, counters the disadvantage the most. Simple as that.
By your own admission a railgun on a kite is more effective than a railgun on a non-kite.
Walt Projectiles inherit the velocity of the ship they're fired from, so if two ships are moving at the same speed, their weapons should have the same range.
Wrong. The pursuing ship accelerates towards the kite and the kite accelerates away at the same rate to comply with its attack range setting. This means you're in an accelerating reference frame with all the consequences thereof. Since the projectiles aren't accelerating with the ships they appear from the perspective of the ships to be accelerating in the opposite direction.
Atarlost Wrong. The pursuing ship accelerates towards the kite and the kite accelerates away at the same rate to comply with its attack range setting. This means you're in an accelerating reference frame with all the consequences thereof. Since the projectiles aren't accelerating with the ships they appear from the perspective of the ships to be accelerating in the opposite direction.
Nothing I've said is wrong, and nothing you've said is wrong either. I'm taking about ships moving at constant velocity, you're taking about ships undergoing acceleration.
I don't disagree that a kiter accelerating away will have a range advantage, I'm just trying to clarify a common misconception about weapon ranges when ships are moving at constant velocity.
Walt I have no idea why you think I disagree with that statement. Nothing I've said contradicts it.
Your claim that the idea that weapon ranges differ between the kite and the kited is a misconception contradicts it. At worst people are right for the wrong reasons (if empirical observation can be a wrong reason) because they don't realize that they're looking at an accelerating reference frame when they lock the viewpoint to a ship or to the midpoint between two ships in a chase.
Walt Just want to make sure. Will the rail gun stay the same, or are you planning to give them different range in the future? Despite how OP the rail gun snipers sound like, they were never a thing in the meta. There are full of face-hugging walls and missile kiters. Both can give the sniper a hard time. Especially the missile kiters, whom can never be touched by any types of rail gun ships with the current range they have.
