turret hardpoints on capships

[RingoW]

I have seen a lot of balancing threads recently, but nothing about illogical and absurd directions turrets can shoot on some capital ships. I mean the turret barrel facing direction. No major part of the hull should cover this direction.

For example:
1. Battlestar. All hardpoints (placed horizontically on front and side only) have 140 to 150 dgree rotation to each side. All above 90 degree to each side does mean, they would kill the ship by themself by shooting through the hull.

2. BHG Battleship (i know, it might be replaced). All hardpoints have 360 degree rotation. Nearly all of them placed on positions, 360 degree will result in shooting through major parts of the hull.

3.Same for BHG BC. Many of the hardpoints have a orientation and position, leading to a covered direction by major parts of the hull.

All the same does happen for vanilla caps to. If anyone is interested, look by yourself with HardCMP editor.

So in my opinion, this needs to be fixed first, before demanding anything else in combination with capships.
It would make them more vulnerable, if they cannot use nearly all turrets for nearly all directions.

AoM

[Jinx]

well, i would have limited the hardpoints on the juggernaut replace - but its gotto be identical - and currently, the hardpoints are 16x rotating/360 - 360 ... meaning, they fire anywhere but straight through their own base.

tried to limit the liberty assault frigates turrets, too - but there as well, i gotto copy / paste their hardpoint stats.

mind, some ships need this feature - as it is actually one of their ... features. ... when the shape is so determines where the turrets can fire - a lot of capital ships loose a lot of weaponpower - vanilla designs included, cause they have turrets that fire through a turret before it.

the arcs would be greatly limited allowing many ships ( especially the thin ones ) to fire only a fraction of their guns foreward. ( the nomad BB could only fire like 1/3 of its guns foreward, the spyglass, too - etc )

its not logical - but its not logical to build a ship 50 times the size of a fighter and only give it 16 turrets, too. - imo, some of the stuff is simply necessary and not really such a big deal.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[Eppy]

If that's the case, AoM, you'll need to create and balance a set of turrets for every capital ship in the game. The Liberty Dreadnought, with all of its forward firepower, will become even more godly than it is now, the other three House Battleships will become floating scrappiles, and in general it'll be what is normally referred to in the states as a 'Cluster', if you get my drift. Nice thought-won't work. It'd need a whole mod version to itself.

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.

[RingoW]

As i have said, major parts of the Hull. If they are covered by minor parts like other turrets or small plates or antennas, they are good to go, but not shooting through entire Hull.
Also the turrets have an exhaust cone asigned for projectiles. Means they can leave the turret barrel up to additional 45 degrees or something like that.

AoM

[El Nino]

Well some of the most buggering turrets should be fixed, althou then all of them would have to be rebalanced...

---

Donate to the Poor Pilot's Fundation via Sirius Bank /givecash GreenHawk 1000000 now, and support poor pilots sirius wide!
Skype: jure.grbec
My primary char: Jose El Nino - Corsair Elder captain of the SS Greenhawk

Currently Inactive due to pursuit of life long dreams, will be back...*edited* As promised am back.

[mjolnir]

Sure it should be made a bit more logical... some "shooting trough" is ok... but shooting trough the whole ship ( like most older GBs do - Corsair GB for example) should definitely be removed.

Some others ships are mostly fine even though they are "old" - Outcast Dessie for example. The turrets from the top don't shoot down. Same with most vanilla capships.

After all I don't think that so many ships are affected by this, from the top of my head I can think only of those:
(note that I'm not that much of a cap driver)

Heavy Tanker, Container Transport
Corsair GB, IMG GB?
Red Hessian Cruiser?
Talarca?


BHG GS, BHG BC and Liberty BC are getting a different model anyway.

Some modder should have a look on that - AoM ?:)

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.

[Jinx]

turrets don t shoot down anyway - even with a 360 degrees arc. - they are limited ( as long as they are revolving ) to a mostly upper arc.

ships like the juggernaut fire through all the hull ( with a weaker spot from above , cause the turrets are mounted upside down - hence cannot fire through their own turrets base )

however unlogical though - i wouldn t like to be the one "fixing" all the hardpoints. - its not like its a whole lot of fun to fix stuff in hardCMP - and there are a lot of ships out there - with a lot of turrets.

for the most part of it - i consider that problem a secondary problem. - its mostly a cosmetic prob - but hardly a balancing problem ( we would get a balancing problem if we fixed them )

i think new models should try to place turrets logicly - ( maybe its even possible to work on that on replaces - i am not aware what is "allowed" to alter and what not when it comes to hardpoints ) - for now - for example.... i had to give the whole BHG capital ships ( replaces ) the turrets the old ones have .... thats 360 degrees turrets everywhere ( sad but true - the turrets have the maximum spin ) - if we knew IN TIME if its possible to limit the arcs on replace models, i would do it - but as long as i don t have a word from igiss about it.... the models are submitted exactly like the old ones with all the wrong firing arcs.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[mjolnir]

I thought it was possible to limit firing arc on replacements.

However I don't agree that "we don't have a balancing problem now, but we will get it if we change them"

Take the Corsair GB - 8 turrets on almost all directions... vs the Outcast dessie (only 4 down) or a Rheinland GB (limited firing arcs on all turrets) isn't that a problem?

Or the BHG caps you mentioned... aren't they a bit uber against the said Outcast dessie that can only fire 4 down (as it should) ?

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.

[Jinx]

if you compare the BHG destroyer with the outcast destroyer - you ll see that the outcast destroyer will most likely win. ( 12 turrets and a slim shape against 8 turrets and a slim - but a bit bulkier shape ) - it has more guns and is agile enough to bring them all at the target. - of course you cannot compare the outcast destroyer with the BHG battlecruiser, since they are a different shipclass sharing the same basic class ( in lack of a cruiser class ).

what i mean with balance is that...

the zoner juggernaut is "known" for its devastating 16 turrets that can fire foreward and - to almost any other direction but totally upwards or downwards. - its some sort of a characteristic - one that makes up for its "relative" weak armour considering its size ( about 100.000 less than the nomad BB which isn t much bigger - but only slightly longer ) - anyway, both cannot dodge, so whats the fuss.

a logical arc on all turrets would mean to cripple its abilities greatly - and i don t expect it to gain "compensations" for it. - and thats the problem. - while it is possible to rebalance the ships... its a hard job to do - and needs a lot of testing. - i m not sure if its simply worth it. - most of the ships have been around for a long time, and especially the capital ships aren t too unbalanced towards each other.

some are weaker ( bretonian gunboat, BHG destroyer ) - some are stronger ( BHG BC, osiris due to its size, juggernaut due to its arcs )

however, if you think it has priority - i am sure you can work on it in HardCMP and balance the ships and test them. - but i wouldn t really support that - mostly cause i think its a waste of time. - so i d say - we try to have logical arcs on new ships and replaces - but i wouldn t backwards fix the ships we have.

like i said - a lot of capships are gonne be replaced ( if igiss agrees ) - and if he says that its possible to fix the arcs - i would do it at least on the replaces i am submitting. - if however there is no word about it. - i won t, cause the effect might be that igiss has to check all the hardpoints to make sure they are identical to the spot with the old models.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[RingoW]

When it comes to hardpoints, only the number and naming are important. Orientation and position have no effects to other *.ini files. Even on replacements, orientation and position can be set up as you want.
Means Juggernaught has, for example, 16 HP|Revolute|HpTurret** (** = 01 - 16). So the replacement also must have 16 HP|Revolute|HpTurret** (** = 01 - 16), to avoid uneccessary work for Igiss or troubles for players. Thats all.

AoM