NEBULOUS Devlog #27: Protectorate Edge

[@jhong6710]

I really enjoy the fact that plasma weapons are essentially just space molotovs, which makes complete sense for the OSP.

[@Blitz2o]

I hope someone mods in some Covenant Ships from Halo that we can strap those Plasma cannons onto.

[@timidapollo]

nice, makes me wonder how catastrophic it would be to get hit in an ammo rack full of plasma bottles. Hoping its less explodey than normal ammo, instead throwing fire effects all over the ship.

[@joshuadickinson4614]

@@timidapollo Pretty sure the "bottle" refers to the magnetic field containing the plasma rather than a physical munition, so likely no ammo racks.

[@Allstar-yl1ek]

@@joshuadickinson4614 Except you can't launch a magnetic field out of a coilgun, but you can launch a container with a magnetic confinement chamber (no idea if correct term) inside it.

[@joshuadickinson4614]

@@Allstar-yl1ek Which is why plasma weapons don't really exist IRL. Also every time I've seen the term "bottle" in this kind of context (both sci-fi and actual physics) it has refered to some kind of field.

[@13deadghosts]

God damn, the Update looks nice :) Can't wait to play the OSP. Regarding the lore at 15:20 I am probably committing heresy, but I would rewrite the Lore of the Mass driver a bit. As Asteroid are mostly made from loose gravel, shooting them with a big ass slug would be pretty counterproductive, spraying gravel everywhere. Maybe instead, the mining ships, after extracting the resources send the refined/enriched/compacted resources via mass driver back to a station for further processing. This would explain why the projectile is so large, as a larger "projectile" allows for larger resource packages. You might ask, why one would use a mass driver. Because if the miner is anchored to the asteroid, which he most certainly will have to be, it allows the miner to send back the extracted resources without expending fuel for it and also not having to haul the resources around himself, costing again fuel. It is also a very real and pretty neat concept, I link you the Wikipedia article: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_driver Anyway, just my 2ct. have a nice day :)

[@emotodude]

I like this

[@GeneralPhanter]

This is good

[@vp21ct]

Someone has played Aurora4x

[@cptnoname]

The problem I've always seen with this type of system is in recovering the packets. The physics makes perfect sense on the surface, but are they intercepted by ships? Would that not require nearly as much fuel in itself? Surely one would not slam it into the planet or risk trying to capture them at a station. If they were caught by a station then each packet caught, regardless of method, is going to affect the station's orbit, as well, requiring energy and fuel to offset the momentum. If they're being sent to a lower stellar orbit, then they're coming in with even more energy as they fall further into the gravity well. How can an installation on an asteroid aim with enough precision that the packet wouldn't need mid-course correction. They would almost have to be launched with thrusters and guidance systems. I'd love to see the actual full details of a system like that, but I'm pretty sure I'd be screaming NIMBY unless it's being sent to a station at Earth's solar L4 or L5 or something lol

[@nocare]

@@cptnoname You save fuel in 4 ways depending on the target location and you also save time. First you always get to save the fuel that otherwise would have been spent on accelerating up to speed. So even if you still spend fuel for midcourse corrections and slowing down at the destination that saves half the fuel. Which increases payload by 30-40% all else being equal. (Note this is only true if the energy density of your reactor is much greater than the energy density/efficiency of your engines; or if you use external power like solar to power the mass driver) On top of this assuming a crewed spacecraft you are not wasting the fuel of hauling the crew and life-support systems back and forth every time you need to transfer cargo. So if a ship can send 3 or 4 cargo loads before actually needing to return to base then you have saved all of the fuel that would have been used for the crew mass going out and back 4 times. This gives the added benefit that the resources can go to a diffrent location than the ship. If the destination has an atmosphere then you only need enough fuel onboard the projectile to do midcourse corrections and a small insertion burn. Neither of which take a lot of fuel. This is because the payload can use aerocapture to shed velocity and get into orbit for later pickup. If the destination is the surface then you don't even need enough fuel for the final burn that raises the orbit out of the atmosphere enough to be stable till pickup. You only need enough fuel to refine your reentry so you land in the intended pickup zone on the ground. The last scenario is no diffrent than interplanetary missions. The reentry capsule won't slow down into orbit of the planet it will drop at interplanetary speeds straight into the atmosphere and simply bleed all of its velocity as heat. 2000 people die per year getting hit by lighting. 1.3 million people die each year in car related accidents. To have a legitimate NIMBY claim while being willing to even go outside would be wholly inconsistent with the risk actually involved.

[@lcomandante1197]

I have barely started scratching the surface of this beautifully complicated game (especially for my ooga-booga-pew-pew brain), but I am loving every aspect of it, especially little details like colors, names, badges and music. Music of this game is just... Perfect.

[@wrathfulcoma4357]

The bloom thing is exactly how “Drop Fleet Commander” does it to Val be the rail-guns/mass drivers

[@IroncladLion]

Very happy to hear about the PD re-code, that should hopefully encourage more ballistic PD. Just like in your intro, ballistic PD is amazing visually. Current games however it seems mandatory to use Auroras, and a lot of them, making many battles look like "Battle at the disco" than warships fighting it out. OSP look EXTREMELY fun to use, and I can't wait to experiment with them soon! That plasma especially has me interested. The industrial look is not only a fitting contrast to the Alliance, but oozes style. Looks like they have a lot of different options that'll surely mix up battles. Something I was wondering, are there any plans to increase the amount of maps? Pillars is great, but, its pillars 24/7. We could really use some similar sized and density maps. Is there a map focused update anytime soon, or will mapping be left to modders (Not that it's a bad thing, since you fine devs should focus on game systems anyways)? I wouldn't mind some of the more popular modded maps being included in the base game. Other minor feedback: Wake sensors could use an improvement. I would imagine that heat-seeking would be a reliable method of tracking for missiles, but currently wake sensors feel incredibly inconsistent, even if approaching a target ship from behind that is under full burn. Love the devlogs, and thanks for making this awesome game!

[@KoishiVibin]

I just want the ability to configure fuzing radii for defensive missiles so I can ruin OSP man's day with my S3 Anti Missile Torpedoes.

[@philipfahy9658]

Wake seekers are in an awkward spot ngl. They suck as a primary seeker, but they are one of the best secondary seekers out there.

[@concordemakesvideos1070]

not sure what I come here for more, the Game Updates, The Editing of the intro, the Intro Music, or the fact that i heccin' love this game

[@Blitz2o]

Easily my favorite Indie Game right now. Can't wait for the OSP update and the mods that will follow.

[@Chreeeis]

Thank you guys for making the coolest space battle simulator in existence. Sure this is a niche today, but please never forget your work is pioneering and will be recognized down the line.

[@Omapk]

I'm really happy that the jamming weapons give the enemy a vector.

[@Jsay18]

Thank you admitting that you overnerfed Rails and assuaging the faction balance fears. The members of the discord seem incredibly toxic about those issues.

[@BurntCornMuffin]

I like the new "pending symbol" on the jam tracks, it kind of gives the feel of transitioning from a ranged contact to a true Track While Scan contact in an aircraft fire control radar (as seen in DCS)

[@rakisuzuki-burke4148]

I love the strobe lines that jamming now gives. It makes being massively jammed so much less painful. Also, will PDS fire against cannon rounds as well as railguns?

[@philipfahy9658]

You had me at 4 barrel defender

[@rakisuzuki-burke4148]

Yessss. Defender best pdt.

[@Marinealver]

I think the difficulty with rail is what differentiate them from just the regular cannons? Beams are short range, Missiles are long range. I'd say increase rail gun penetration amd make rail gun flashes easier to see so they can be dodged by smaller craft outside of hammerlock range.

[@jt6581]

got the game today, all the videos i saw were pretty good and all...but your intro jesus makes this look beautiful!!

[@Wenchbane]

Loving this update. On the clippers, would love to see the other concepts eventually make an appearance later on next year if there's time to work it in. Can't wait for the update though!

[@Gneckes]

I love it and I cannot wait to get my hands on the OSP.

[@admiralcasperr]

I have a game design question: why did you decide to have drag affect ships, since it doesn't affect ballistic projectiles? It's wierd for a simulation oriented game.

[@sethhuff8657]

new major update, new defender buff, will it be good?

[@emotodude]

I'm not sure I like PD being able to shoot down rails. Because then why can't they shoot down everything else ? I think the answer to rails being OP is to simply reduce their accuracy in relation to the quality of the track. Such that you would need a very good radar and very close proximity to get enough track accuracy to rain rails super accurately from a long distance.

[@GordonSeal]

Just make them fire less often and reload more slowly. The problem of this game is that it wants to be a space-combat game, but also maintain naval-combat close ranges. You can't have both, and thus you get the problem of railguns being so accurate at long ranges.

[@nicholaszonenberg8023]

Looking awesome :D Really looking forward to this coming out and being able to play around with it myself! Plus a LOT of these features are exactly the type of thing a bunch of modders are interested in!

[@hardworkingslacker7233]

I like the changes to jamming a lot. It really is quite aggressive and disorienting as of yet, so toning that down a little is a nice change!

[@Level100BeefBoss]

Will the plasma weapons be capable of doing significant damage on its own, or will they strictly be used for weakening armor?

[@szabolcs__]

In space engineers, had a similar problem, but not with religions but kamikaze attack . So I think solution, the point difference would alter the railgun projectile course when it hits it.

[@WeWhoAreXul]

Prepare to broadside!

[@sandpirate1662]

Cross the T!

[@emotodude]

Shut up and take my money! With development like this, I will happily pay for the game twice.

[@ShadowGJ]

The PD counter to railguns feels weird. I'd rather they were more sensitive to jamming, perhaps, or that they were more reliant on spotters to reliably land long range fire.

[@quantum5661]

eh, way i see it it gives you a credible way to sandbag pd from long range ahead of missile salvos

[@Furman2137]

yeah, the only pd that should somewhat work should railgun pd and maybe massed flak fire, the projectiles are just too fast

[@ShadowGJ]

@@Furman2137 I'm more concerned about the fact it technically opens the door to basically every projectile being interceptable. I mean, it doesn't make much sense to allow fast railgun slugs to be interceptable while slow cannon rounds aren't, but you don't want to go down that road.

[@HiddenPrior]

This is the juiciest devlog yet. Amazing work!

[@CheapSushi]

Point defense being able to shoot incoming rail rounds makes no sense at all if they can't also counter 450mm rounds. The game has a nice balance of "plausibility" and that shouldn't get thrown out the window. Being able to take down much faster and smaller rounds but not bigger and much slower ones is bordering on magical / fantasy gameplay rulesets.

[@eridanusindustries9427]

I wouldn't say it borders on fantasy at all. Interception of kinetic projectiles is pretty common in the hardest of scifi, and completely absent in soft scifi. While the railgun ammunition is listed as 300mm, that is the size of the sabot package. The actual projectile is a small tungsten arrow, which is pretty brittle, and slamming a dozen 20mm slugs a second into it would most likely cause it to shatter or at the very least be knocked off course. Their boosted EM signature makes them easier to track as well. Larger rounds, like the 450mm on the other hand, are huge and hitting them with bullets probably wouldn't do anything. But really it all boils down to gameplay and performance. Countering normal anti-ship guns comes with plenty of options because most ships are fighting in the same range envelope. Tracking every ballistic round in flight would also be a huge performance cost, as sensors and PD are the two most expensive systems in the game. This change also make the "PD Tax" less overbearing, because now PD has the added benefit of helping against a second class of weapon instead of being a total waste if your enemy has no missiles.

[@birthdwt8859]

@@eridanusindustries9427 small addition, but having the shattered dart have a fragmentation effect would be cool to see.

[@basedeltazero714]

​@@eridanusindustries9427 See I just figured with conventional ballistics having a much higher rate of fire they just wouldn't be able to keep up with them. So you can shoot at conventional kinetics and you can shoot them down, but there's just gonna be more behind them.

[@CheapSushi]

@@eridanusindustries9427 You're saying dozens of 20mm rounds hitting a 450mm shell wouldn't do anything in space? Not even slow down the rounds? Not even slightly push it off course? That alone could save a ship from a hit. It doesn't make sense that no energy would be imparted. Although I don't know the maths involved to say if significant or not. Also are the 450mm casings made out of Unobtainium? What are the 20mm bullets made out of? They'd just completely shatter on the 450mm casing with no energy transfer or piercing through and at least making the HE rounds explode? I guess it doesn't matter because you acknowledge it's a situation of picking and choosing for gameplay & performance sake. I get the computational aspect and that's valid without a doubt. But then why add that expense on rail rounds? It just feels like hand wavy effort to make sure rails don't really get used much after trying to reintroduce them as something worthwhile again especially on battleships (even mentioned in the video). But I'm just one person from the community and maybe most other people would prefer it that way as you stated. Just my 2 cents of course. I'll still be playing. Regardless, OSP looks awesome.

[@Nyx_2142]

@@eridanusindustries9427 You talk so much but say so little. Regardless of how much word salad you want to throw into your explanation, its clear you are just hand waving away realism for fantastical bullshit that makes no sense. "Larger rounds, like the 450mm on the other hand, are huge and hitting them with bullets probably wouldn't do anything." Confidently stating this tells me how little you actually know for someone supposedly building a "realistic/plausible" space battle game. CheapSushi is spot on with calling out your nonsense regarding this. " Interception of kinetic projectiles is pretty common in the hardest of scifi, and completely absent in soft scifi." Also, this isn't an argument in your favor at all, its a broad and inaccurate statement because you are grasping at straws to counter his final statement regarding it being handwavy fantastical bullshit, which is exactly what it is. Stop rambling and bumbling out excuses with jargon and lies and just own up to it. Its pathetic. And its quite telling so many people in these comments are calling out the nonsensical decision already.

[@shadow7988]

Plasma looks like it'll make guns a lot more usable against heavier ships. I imagine mixed-faction teams are gonna have a field day if they work together.

[@rakisuzuki-burke4148]

Oh, it'll be beautiful.

[@timvictor8926]

This looks amazing! Any news on an Apple Silicon version?

[@nikolatasev4948]

Looks great! Doesn't it make sense for railguns to increase damage as they go through stuff? Like - if they go into an unarmored compartment, they move fast and shatter, but the fragments are in a relatively narrow cone and make a narrow enter and exit holes. It would definitely depressurize the compartment, but cause very few ricochets around. The second and third compartments would have much larger cones, and many more ricochets. This would naturally decrease damage done to small ships, and massively increase it for large ships. I'm not an expert in the field, but this would make sense to me.

[@jatzi1526]

Railguns getting shot down by pd is very weird and I'm not sure I like it. But I guess that's the sort of weird crap that happens when you make a game for pvp. I mean honestly to me the counter for rails is rails. If someone has rails then shoot them with your own rails. Or good maneuvering to get close without getting hit. Teamwork. Things like that. Good missile design. Or fighters, since carriers will be a thing they could be a good counter to railgun-armed ships. But I guess weird things that don't make sense works too

[@KoishiVibin]

"just have the same tactic" That is not good design.

[@jatzi1526]

@@KoishiVibin if you'll notice I said many things that work to counter them. The maps aren't open space. You can sneak up on an opponent with rails. Carriers could in the future counter them. Solid teamwork. Railgun rounds getting shot down is just stupid imo. Again it's a pvp game at its core so I expect dumb shit like this to happen to appease people. Still dumb though

[@dragoscostache4]

Yeah, idk how people are ok with corvettes/missile spam but draw the line at rails being viable. At least against rails I have options like move from cover to cover and the stuff you said. The maps are leaning towards extremely close range engagements anyway.

[@KoishiVibin]

@@dragoscostache4 Missile spam can be shot down, railgun fire cannot. It's the feelings, I guess. One can be fired from comically long range with almost zero warning, the other can be fired from long range but has travel time and countermeasures.

[@MissionReloadedGaming]

Oh this footage is GORGEOUSLY EDITED!

[@TheJackHood]

I'm so hyped for the OSP, looks like it's going to fit my playstyle perfectly

[@davidalldred9392]

Absolutely loving this. Thanks Devs!

[@argokarrus2731]

So now my only question, if PD can shoot down rails, why not normal guns? I guess the extra electromagnetic radiation giving them a better radar signature?

[@yourfriend8052]

Gameplay. There’s no scientific reason.

[@fandovec03]

I would guess 450s use WW2 style rounds which could be more resistant? Railgun rods are basicaly modern APFSDS which are easy to split and shatter if you hit it in right places. That's basically how modern ERA/APS can affect APFSDS. I am deriving this from how ERA/APS work so take this with a grain of salt.

[@Furman2137]

@@fandovec03 while a fair point, I still see no way a 20mm slug wouldn't be able to punch through a 450mm shell, it would have 20-30mm armor penetration capability irl, that's something an armoured car might have, it's way too much for a conventional shell. It's mostly gameplay balance it seems

[@basedeltazero714]

He said 'PD can shoot down kinetic rounds', so my guess would be 'it can. The question is whether it can shoot down *enough*.'

[@CheapSushi]

@@basedeltazero714 no, he acknowledged it wouldn't work on 450mm; I was questioning it too

[@icotica921]

I am curious what the lore is for the plasma weapons, is it like a home brew weapon, or tech that was originally considered obsolete?

[@republiccommando6104]

Nice of you mentioning the SYS and PRISM mods! Love them both! Although, I am curious about one thing; with the amount of work done on the SYS mod, have you talked with its developer on making the faction official? I know the possibility of it happening is extremely low, maybe even never, but I'm really curious as the SYS is really well done so far!

[@shaftoe195]

Great video. Looking forward to the OSP making it into the game.

[@rzu1474]

ehm... if PD can shoot down rail gun rounds it should be able to shoot down all artillery. easy

[@ARandomTroll]

The jamming changes are great. I always disliked how you would get fake FCR lock tracks on a ship without fire control radar. The bearing is also great. The capital ship gets jammed, but now it can light up the enemy with illuminators (because why bother with stealth on an Axford?) so the escorts can put extra breathing holes in TF Ash (or you can just break through with a bullseye). I feel like this will greatly encourage the use of escorts and proper screening. And make HOJ viable for it's intended purpose. About the rails: I actually liked the idea of making rails a support weapon for taking out priority targets protected by distance or being in the middle of a giant death ball. For this, they do unfortunately need to be good against both small and large targets. I feel like the component damage changes would go long way towards actually making them able to destroy things. I'm iffy about the radar bloom. If the spyglarss gets an arbitrary hard cutoff at 11.5 km regardless of SNR, That hard cutoff should be consistent. It would also kill half of the possible uses for rail dds. Instead of a full track, give us a lingering muzzle flash marker on the map and a 45° cone 30km ELINT signal. I never felt like tracking the rail ship was a huge problem, because it's useless without scouts. (which brings us back to ELINT and scout hunting). At ranges where the rail ship can engage without scouts, it's already visible and also outgunned by pretty much everything. About your rail suggestions: LASERS CAN cut refractory materials, arguably quite well. I don't like the PD vs rails idea. It makes little sense, not based on damage but hit probability. If they can't reliably hit a fat missile crossing their range over the course of several seconds, how are they going to see, evaluate, target and actually shoot a tiny tungsten dart crossing their range in

[@fire_fish6052]

Mazer, i hope you know i laughed my ass off at the stretched sprinter textures, very funny to see mismatched long hull numbers for no reason

[@Bishop1664]

Awesome update. The plasma splash effects look amazing

[@Phrosphor]

Awesome! I cannot wait!

[@blacklight9359]

You’ll have to come back and make us more content :P

[@SprikSprak]

A thought on additional defence against artillery - have you considered some form of kinetic smoke screen, like a pile of magnetised scrap or something, that could be fired, disperse and block line of sight and signature (to a degree) and block or at least slow dumb rounds passing through it? Great update btw

[@sethhuff8657]

where brick?

[@AGTheOSHAViolationsCounter]

Hmmm I gotta say the plasma weapons remind me of Project MARAUDER. The USAF Toridal plasma weapon project that showed promise in the late 80's-mid90's( it was promptly classified on showing that promise ofc). Given the Dev's Naval background I wonder he drew any inspiration from that project? Regardless I look forward to playing the new update. Well as much as I'm able given my system isn't the best tho able to run it. It just has the rather unfortunate and distressing tendency to.....well crash mid-engagement lol.

[@pocketbattlesar]

Great work!

[@war-stalker]

Since plasma is magnetic bottle it should be just as counterable by PDs, as railgun projectiles.

[@xxxxCronoxxxx]

another route you could go to balacing PD against kinetic rounds is having them throw the rounds off target so that they may miss.

[@patrikg.6320]

coding that in unity would probably be a massive pain

[@xxxxCronoxxxx]

@@patrikg.6320 ah, that would make sense, especially depending on how you code projectiles in the first place.

[@Jsay18]

It would be cool tho, like imagine hitting a round, but it ricochet's off and hits another target, or your own ships!

[@fennecky3764]

Oooooo I’m so excited

[@kedrednael]

A railgun round can punch through thick armor, multiple components and thick armor again. Does it even make sense that one PD round can just make it vanish? Wouldn't it just slow the railgun round down slightly, flake of a couple tungsten shards, maybe change the direction and rotation slightly?

[@exoticbreadstick8661]

if you were to hit it, it would be knocked off course to the point that it misses, melted (the lasers) to the point that it is ineffective as a penetrator, or fragmented, which is also ineffective against armor.

[@josephborra5754]

I'm guessing that they assume it shatters on impact and the shards traverse the inside of the ship doing damage. Due to the high speed of the round, the damage cone is pretty much linear and exit the hull like we've seen in the game. In this case, their solution makes a little more sense, but yeah, I kinda agree. Maybe they should change that so that after suffering the PD, the MD round still reaches the target (in pieces) but instead of penetrating all the way through and dealing piercing damage, the disintegrated bits wear down the armor like high velocity space dust would...

[@Chaos_Rifle]

holy crap that intro volume is so much louder than the video volume. regarding what we hardcores talk about for balance - anti-hybrid PD sucks at shooting down hybrids, and to have good PD now its ~21% of a fleets cost into PD measures (hardkill, softkill, all of it), where as pre-update PD was about 7% the cost of a fleet. PD didn't get better based on how much better missiles got - particularly hybrids. Sarissa really only helps railgun fleets which dont really need that kind of defence anyways, and aurora's turn off too quickly to shoot down more than one or two hybrids unless Bshorted, in which case you loose the aurora from that missile salvo almost always. Good to hear PD got recoded, because watching aurora's routinely miss hybrids was infuriating. sad to see the jamming effect go, was one of favourite visual effect in the game. What is the accuracy on the jamming LoB? ELINT is 3 degrees, which is useless for a gun solution. hopefully its less than 1 degree. The reason people are worried OSP will suck is because you said in the last dev log something to the effect of "if you are worried about meta plays, dont play OSP" in regards to ship-scumming. it was phrased ambiguously and people will get carried away when you make a statement like that, so open-endedly. (Those OSP guns (the greyboxes previously) look fucking amazing, so I'm not too worried, but its your words that started the fears) a note on jamming, on its own its not unbearable, the reason its an issue is that comm jamming is so freaking powerful, and makes the most practical of the counters to jamming useless its also the most cost effective. its universally cheaper or roughly the same cost to use jammers that work everywhere than to use a dedicated jammer counter, and jammers are infinite use, unlike some counters (like HoJ) . it also pairs INSANELY well with comm jamming, because of how strong that is (unsure if the calculations are just bugged or what, but its insane in actual testing, axford antennas don't do shit all against comm jamming). its also not fun because its whole mechanic is "you don't get to play the game anymore", which removes the fight for the attacker and defender, resulting in boring matches for both players. jamming removes the ability to fight back, or degrades it so bad that even a favourable matchup (ie destroyers vs axford or solomon, or a solomon vs frigates) is a guaranteed loss because your dps tanks so badly due to no accuracy, or no track at all. good to see a LoB at least for the jammer sources.. but I suspect the way this will play is now jammers will get mounted on a larger ship like a CL or bigger and becomes a shield that must be killed before anything else can, and because its a LoB instead of a track, the guns wont lead the target, and still reduce hitrates significantly enough to still win fights with ease.

[@Evil_beanos]

Cool devlog seies

[@0xA9F]

I am somewhat curious how many cruel Zumwalt memes were posted on the discord...

[@BSenta]

Why not create an ability to try auto doge railgun rounds once their trajectory is known. In expanse railguns are a close range weapon

[@egillskallagrimson5879]

I'm not happy seeing decisions made upon complaining of people... you should take your vision to the end no matter the players, the whole game is already base on the fact that, we nebulous fans are space geeks that want a hardcore sci fi game. I'm sorry for those who just can't handle visual effects of jamming but the whole point of jamming is to disorienting the target so they don't know where u are. And for railguns... it looks preposterous to be able to intercept them but ok it's not beyond the realm of possibility but it should have like the Expanse a "killzone" where if you are shot by a railgun in that distance u can't avoid or intercept the projectile because it's too fast, which is the whole point of magnetic induction weapons, if you want to avoid rail fire u either keep the distance so u have space to handle the thread or close distance as fast as you can so the turret or axial weapon can't lock on u. Sorry if I too look as I am complaining but since u want feedback there u have it. On the other side OSP looks cool as F***. I can't wait to expend an unhealthy amount of hours in the fleet editor with all the madness of modularity the faction has.

[@eridanusindustries9427]

Thank you for the feedback, but the changes to jamming were not the result of people complaining and the strobe LOBs were a feature I've been meaning to implement for a while. Modern radars are able to determine the direction of jamming and display it to the operator, even if they can't resolve tracks in that direction due to the jamming. As for the visual effect, while I did enjoy the original visuals it did always seem a little strange that the radar would display full tracks as a result of jamming, some of which were even showing as locked. This new effect is actually a bit more technically correct, as this is what a high clutter environment looks like on a real radar. In the game, the true benefit of jamming is the increased noise ratio which either drops tracks completely or greatly reduces the accuracy of the ones the radar is able to still hold. The "player disorientation" factor kind of bordered on bad UI design, and I do kind of regret that.

[@egillskallagrimson5879]

@@eridanusindustries9427wasn't complaining of the new feature of being able to detect direction of jamming, makes sense and it seems logical that if a cone of noise is coming at you at least you know to some degree the point of origin. Not an expert on radar and wave behaviour but I understand why to add this feature. Btw when I said that I am not happy didn't meant I disagree with the dev team, my point is that players should trust in the original vision of the devs it is what has deliver the game in the first place, and feedback and explaining shouldn't be presented as a cry nor should crying heavily influence your decisions, in my experience it is imposible to satisfy everyone so if you have to choose, choose yourself.

[@AvalancheTRA]

very exciting

[@rakisuzuki-burke4148]

What about the container missiles? They were the most OSP weapon you designed.

[@thesilverspanch]

Good stuff! I love the purple plasma bolts!

[@bigfungus7870]

Based.

[@patrikg.6320]

This looks pretty incredible but please i beg you for the love of all things space warfare allow us to dedicate pd groups to primary focus on rails or missiles. Missiles sneaking under railgun fire is already giving me anxiety.

[@eridanusindustries9427]

Railgun rounds are "size -1" missiles to the PD controller, so real missiles will always have priority for PD tasking.

[@birthdwt8859]

@@eridanusindustries9427 have you considered adding doctrine for pd turrets similar to missles to designate specific size missles?

[@patrikg.6320]

@@eridanusindustries9427 thank you so, so much

[@basedeltazero714]

@@birthdwt8859 Yeah that'd be useful, so we don't have Sarissas wasting shots on Size 1s instead of reserving for big missiles.

[@Crano_Brakebart]

Not going to lie pd agenst rail guns sounds dumb, but iam happy to be wrong through

[@Welkon1]

Mark...? Is that you?

[@johndane9754]

Hold on, if point defenses can now shoot down high speed rail gun slugs, why can't they do the same with the slower conventional shells?

[@birthdwt8859]

Railgun fires a sabot, 300mm is the size of the barrel. Sabots are more prone to shattering which negatates a most of thier penetration power

[@johndane9754]

@@birthdwt8859 That does not explain why the same principle does not or could not be applied to a conventional shell fired out of a conventional gun.

[@ashleygraufalke1510]

Gameplay

[@johndane9754]

@@ashleygraufalke1510 Well that's even more than less than helpful.

[@TheMrEvs]

is this one developer making this game?

[@descriptiondescriptiondescript]

Wow that intro 👍👍

[@vodarara7184]

I'm interested to see plasma effects on surface components/weapons

[@bakerhitch5856]

The more you share, the more your bowl bowl will be plentiful.

[@genericname42]

Yes!

[@ermacorsomething]

Pogger

[@jeremybrocknblue5593]

Did you take the vaccine?

[@andrewmiffitt7973]

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[@NikovK]

6:25 I have epilepsy and anyone having a seizure from your jamming effect shouldn't use a computer.

[@corsairraven973]

I don't like that one faction isn't able to get turrets, casemates in a space battle, is not very realistic. a turret is easier to maneuver, then your WHOLE damn ship.

[@SirAroace]

one: they have turrets, just not many. two: logistics overrides tactics, the OSP would love to have more turrets but that lack the logi to make and install more

[@Leader1623]

Any plans to introduce the game to GeForce NOW?

[@Tenebris_Messorem]

Your game is really not bad, but I can't stop being confused by oddities in game design. As example - the range of visual detection is simply ridiculous, as are the distances of engagements, given the claim to realism. The fleet design system is not bad, but... But. The limitation on hardpoints is rather ridiculous, since electronic warfare systems are placed into them. Take, for example, the modern corvette of the Steregushchiy type (or any other modern corvette). She armed with a 100-mm artillery cannon, two rapid-fire autocannons for protection against aircraft, missiles, boats + it's carry additional air defense systems. Next - she carry torpedo tubes for protection against torpedoes and submarines, also it carry Ka-27 antisubmarine helicopter. Two machine guns, two grenade launchers. And it's purely weaponry. In a game you place cannon on the corvette, missiles and that's all. Either put a missile defense, or give up the radar / jammer. Also about radars - modern ships has an FCS with its own radar, a mast radar and several more auxiliary radars for guided missiles target designation, navigation radars, sonar, electronic warfare equipment, etc. In addition, there are systems for setting false targets (both hydroacoustic and thermoradioelectronic. And it's all a simple corvette. In game if you're place radar and then the choice was either the FCS, or the guidance system for guided missiles, or the elevators for ammunition. At the same time, the guns have huge volumes under them that are serves unknown purpose, but not filled with ammunition. Also the requirements for the crew. 100 people on the corvette are needed to fight for survivability, because the water that got into the compartments of the ship can send it to the bottom of the sea. And what will 120 people do in a space ship? Pump out the vacuum?

[@gangsterguardsman4576]

Its a game, like, of course its not going to be a perfect real life analog down to the nitty gritty Vision, gun range, and detection are so short range because otherwise itd be boring waiting 30min to get anywhere/do anything

[@Tenebris_Messorem]

@@gangsterguardsman4576 I mean not accordance with reality, but the difference in approach, with a claim to realism. Also, about time, look at Children of a Dead Earth, there are various options to display closing range to the visual detection distance without having to wait for the real 30 minutes.

[@basedeltazero714]

The ranges are very clearly a gameplay conceit (and, interestingly, the radar ranges are actually accurate to the listed specs - it's just that the sensitivity is unrealistically low). While firing from thousands of kilometers away may be some peoples idea of fun, the presence of like... actual obstacles and tactics certainly adds a bit of spice. You... you absolutely can arm a corvette with a 120mm cannon, two autocannons for point defense, and a missile launcher (which can carry decoys). It comes default with a fire control, navigation, detection and ranging radar. Admittedly it does lack any sonar 🤣 That said, that there's really only _one_ example of each given system (instead of a more realistic version where everything has the cheap version and more specialist ships have larger and better equipment) is sometimes annoying.

[@anglewyrm3849]

You should take a look into fighter pilot radar management, as presented in Digital Combat Simulator (DCS World)