Fixed Cannon Shot Speed Outrage VS Gimbal Cannon

[CMDR Dreamstate]

Okay, it is no secret - we all know all gimbal weapon types are meant to do less damage:

Spoiler

However, unknown to me until now while umming and ahh-ing at weapon choices for my Huge hard-points on the Corvette, I notice this:

Spoiler

Not only do the fixed weapons do more damage than intended, but the shot speed is also increased!?

I can't check all the cannons and multicannons at my current station, but this shot speed bias for fixed cannons (and possibly other fixed weapons) seems to be a bit under the radar, no?

Cannons aren't used enough as it is, and actually lowering the shot speed of gimbals is another kick in the teeth because it increases the miss rate - at 750m/s it is much slower than a Huge Plasma Accelerator slug traversing at 875m/s - of which, the Gimballed Huge Cannon does only 1/4 of the damage (much less after resistances).

Am I the only one that thinks this stinks for gimballed cannons (and possibly all other types of projectile weapons), when the damage has already been reduced?

Why should shot speed be different!?

 

[Imo]

Frontier has nerfed the gimballed weapons into the ground. That's why nobody wants to use them in pvp anymore. This includes dozens of options to make gimballed weapons near useless.

 

[Starbreaker]

Why should shot speed be different!?

No idea, I trialed the gimbaled C4 and found them lacking, they missed too often. I suppose I could put G5 LR on them but opted for OC fixed instead. The placement of the huge hardpoints on the Vette is great for fixed, but cannons also have different shot speeds between sizes which makes the underslung huge and large on the Conda a bit tricky since you have to engineer them to even the difference with fixed. Edit: actually it's only a small difference of 60m/s.

At least cannons are audible now.

 

[golden_eye]

It's actually the other way around. All the cannons had the lower shot speed awhile back but FD made a bunch of buffs to fixed weapons because almost no one used fixed and people complained that the gap between gimbals and fixed wasn't enough to make fixed worth taking.

 

[sewerratuk]

Pick your weapon of choice and go fight first with fixed and then with gimballed and check the real DPS, which includes your time on target, instead of stats on a spreadsheet. Unless you git gud with fixed, gimballed will still win most of the time.

 

[babelfisch]

How about you just use fixed weapons rather than complaining about them being superior? Or are they actually not superior? In that case I don't know what you are complaining about.

 

[StiTch]

Frontier has nerfed the gimballed weapons into the ground. That's why nobody wants to use them in pvp anymore.

Please provide some kind of source or justification for both of these assertions.

OP, I must confess I hadn't noticed this, but cannons in particular suffer for being fixed. Apart from the recent cheese thermal cannons, why would you use a fixed variant? The strength of the cannon lies in subsystem wreckage over sheer DPS: you would either equip a MC, which tends to have a higher effective DPS as the shots will more frequently connect, or need to consistently nail subsystems; the latter being considerably more difficult with slow-traveling projectiles on fixed mounts.

Many pilots consider the long range mod to be integral to cannon use, and I'll give testament to that.

 

[Badben]

PA travels at 875 but is always fixed, no gimballed PA. Gimballed canon can go slower because it's auto aiming, fixed canon needs to be faster or it would be too hard to hit anything with it. But I can pretty much guarantee you'll hit with gimballed canon far more often than with the fixed canon unless you're really really good.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

How about you just use fixed weapons rather than complaining about them being superior? Or are they actually not superior? In that case I don't know what you are complaining about.

Already used fixed plasmas of all sizes - this is more of a post about the gimbal shot speed of huge cannons being a ridiculous 150m/s slower than the fixed variant, when DPS is already substantially lower.

 

[Stealthie]

See, this is what bugs me about when people insist on things in the name of "realism".

ED is not "realistic" in various fundamental ways so it's beyond me why people would demand "realism" of minor features.

Unless, of course, somebody can explain to me how a round of ammunition becomes less powerful and moves more slowly when fired from a weapon with a servo-actuated mounting system.


Gimballed weapons cost more, they weigh more and they use more power (all fine because they're more complex) which already provides a trade-off compared to fixed weapons but then they do less damage and fire projectiles more slowly too, which makes no sense.
Clearly, 3 "nerfs" wasn't enough so they're nerfed in FIVE ways compared to fixed weapons.

 

[babelfisch]

Already used fixed plasmas of all sizes - this is more of a post about the gimbal shot speed of huge cannons being a ridiculous 150m/s slower than the fixed variant, when DPS is already substantially lower.

Yes, my post was more in reaction to CMDR Imo. Anyway, my point still stands: If fixed weapons are so much better I suggest people start using fixed weapons. Since this doesn't happen I'd say they aren't.

 

[Stealthie]

Yes, my post was more in reaction to CMDR Imo. Anyway, my point still stands: If fixed weapons are so much better I suggest people start using fixed weapons. Since this doesn't happen I'd say they aren't.

You seem to be conflating "better" with "more powerful".

Obviously, it's "better" to use a weapon which you can hit your target with.
That doesn't address the issue of why the gimballed weapon is less powerful.

 

[babelfisch]

You seem to be conflating "better" with "more powerful".

Obviously, it's "better" to use a weapon which you can hit your target with.
That doesn't address the issue of why the gimballed weapon is less powerful.

That's what people call balancing. If you could hit more with a gimballed weapon and it would be more powerful there would be no reason for fixed weapons to exist.

 

[Rowander]

I was under the impression that gimballed weapons were not nerfed, it was the other way around: fixed weapons were buffed considerably. Which takes us to point two:

See, this is what bugs me about when people insist on things in the name of "realism".

ED is not "realistic" in various fundamental ways so it's beyond me why people would demand "realism" of minor features.

Unless, of course, somebody can explain to me how a round of ammunition becomes less powerful and moves more slowly when fired from a weapon with a servo-actuated mounting system.

Balancing weapons in a realistic and credible way is not that hard, they've just chosen to use a "gamey" solution that's anything but realistic. It's their choice. I would have liked the realist way, but it's definetly easier for most players to adapt to the gamey solution.

 

[Jukelo]

You seem to be conflating "better" with "more powerful".

Obviously, it's "better" to use a weapon which you can hit your target with.
That doesn't address the issue of why the gimballed weapon is less powerful.

Because Frontier wants to reward the skill of using fixed weapons. It's a design decision, not an issue.

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Oh noes, its gimbal vs fixed again.

Look, gimbal is easier to hit with, but have lower 100%-hit DPS.
Fixed is harder to hit with, but have higher 100%-hit DPS.

This does not mean they balanced to be *same average actual-hit DPS* - its impossible since it will depend on ship its fitted on, target and situation.
Rather they are balance to be "more or less same on average", using actual stats of how many people use each one - so neither gets used more. In global *average*.

 

[Stealthie]

Because Frontier wants to reward the skill of using fixed weapons. It's a design decision, not an issue.

Well, yeah.

It's not something I lose sleep over but that doesn't mean it isn't worthy of note, especially in context of people citing "realism" as a reason for other changes.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Not to mention that we have apparently not managed to move much above in-atmo cannonshell speed from WW2 to today in a MILLENNIA.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Already used fixed plasmas of all sizes - this is more of a post about the gimbal shot speed of huge cannons being a ridiculous 150m/s slower than the fixed variant, when DPS is already substantially lower.

No, gimballed aren't 150m/s slower, fixed is 150m/s faster.

Not to mention that we have apparently not managed to move much above in-atmo cannonshell speed from WW2 to today in a MILLENNIA.

Really, we're going down the realism-road again? Why not add a car analogy while you're at it... [ugh]

 

[Muetdhiver]

Look guys. For all intent and purposes, the cannon shot speed values should be much higher. IRL anti-tank rounds get to 1.8km/s.
For some reason, in ED ships use 17th century pirate cannons or some kind of howitzers. Why one would design a weapon with such
low projectile speed to hit fast moving targets is beyond me. Immershun, where are you ?

Then again, fixed does more damage. If the caliber is the same as gimbal, it has to have more speed. (so at least it kind of make sense. ish.)

Balance > Immershun, unless it's a QoL feature. Then forums ask for Immershun > QoL ^^