Um. Why not make them destructible by all weapons? That way, if you could destroy the first one in a volley, its explosion might set them ALL off. >:-)

I don't mean slow them down like a drop in speed, I mean that we should give them a maximum speed so that when they are fired they will slow down to their max speed like the ships currently do when you let go of turbo. That way when you bull-rush someone and fire a flare at 100m/s, your flare will start at 155m/s but eventually slow itself down to 55m/s. Same for the Avalon and other projectiles. It could also go in reverse. If you are going backwards at -65m/s and fire a flare, it will start at -10m/s but eventually accellerate to 55m/s where it will stop.

What do you think? It would at least put a damper on the flares usefulness as an attacking weapon while making it more feasable as a defensive one.

That sounds great. Now, instead of shooting rockets while moving, people will have to be RIGHT NEXT TO THEIR TARGET for any forward motion to affect the rockets. This is going to stop rocket-ramming... Uhh uhh...

I think it would be enough to just slow down the cycle rate from .5s to .7 or .8s. I don't see a need to play with the speed at all.

Well, I was thinking we would increase the overall speed of the rockets. I just thought it would be nice to be able to use rockets defensively since as it is they are completely useless while running away. It was not meant to be a solution for rocket ramming although it would stop many an accidental ram caused by having to go forward to actually fire your missile. I'm tired of being called a rammer because I fired a rocket while going backwards and took splash because they charged me.

Sage: HAHAHA! That's rich.

Yeah, it does bug me that rockets are basically mines when you fire them while floating backwards, and now that you put it that way, accellerating rockets sounds fine (decellerating rockets on the other hand still sounds strange). I don't know if we should have the sunflares do that, but at least a class of accelerating rockets wouldn't hurt.

I know that I get tired of running away from a rocket rammer's salvo on turbo, only to find that by the time I turn around I don't have time to accellerate up to a useful rocket speed and am facing another cluster of widely fired rockets. And energy weapons are too inaccurate to really be a reasonable responce - though I do find that overall people's dodging skills are really deteriorating.

And its very nice to see someone discussing the rocket NOT in terms having to do with nerfing them.

an alternative: make the rockets an acquirable target and destroyable by energy weapons (like in wing commander). of course, only point defense weapons (read: gatling turret) would be able to really take out a reasonable part of the volleys, thus increasing the chance of a heavy ship at least getting a chance to escape (a valk with no rockets flees, vendettian law #1).
the same with (guided) missiles. i just hate it when i know there's a missile speeding towards me and all i can do is wait for it to hit because 1.) my acceleration is too slow to escape it or 2.) there's no roid i could hide behind in time.
i am unsure as to what a kind of nuisance that would be code-wise, but hey, this is the suggestions thread, innit?

Just a reminder folks: This is a game-universe. Many scientific principles are ignored in the interest of playability.
If you like your physics pure, I hear Lunar Lander is quite nice.

I asked a physics teacher about this, and he said that at the speeds we're using in the test currently, what the rockets do, given the restrictions (ie, they don't accelerate), is accurate.

It's accurate? How? I can see if it's based on the fact that the rockets have a principal speed it would be accurate, but aren't rockets supposed to be self-propelled? They would have their own engines or boosters and not be as reliant on their principle speed.

[sarcasm] Oh yes, and X-plane too! [/sarcasm]

You can't slow down the sunflares.
They'd become totally useless.

Up the speed of energy weapons instead... yeah, and the damage too.
- Archie.

You gotta have some degree of realism tossed in to become more immersed into the role-playing aspects of the game. I'd hate to see Vendetta become totally arcade and very unrealistic. IMO the best sci-fi stories or games are ones where the future would seem more likely, based on scientific principals, than ones that are totally bizarre.

Arolte does have a point there, folks

You need to bring in some pointes of the real scientific bundle, but that doesnt mean that it needs to be the rockets. it can just as easy be the inventory system that can be explained in a scientific way, or the physics mode or the ... .

Dont forget, 99% is scientifical possible to explain, and 1% isnt. So therefore lets just the things that we cant explain be that mumbo jumbo , simsala grim, hokus pokus " So supernatural, outside the scope of our little minds to comprehend some things"

cheers

Well, what ISN'T explainable is why homing missiles slow down to a set speed when fired when Sunflares don't. Maybe it's not realism, but consistency we're looking at. And howabout ships? Instead of having a max boost speed and a normal speed you "for some reason" slow down to, why not let speed be cumulative? Only thing is if you go too fast, your hull starts taking damage a la Terminus.