Fixed Cannon Shot Speed Outrage VS Gimbal Cannon

[Stealthie]

You are now saying they are similar rather than the same yourself. Anyway, the proof you are looking for is in the stats. Since they inflict less damage they must be different in some way.

Well, yes.

Just cos a stat' says something is the case doesn't mean it's plausible though.

Is it plausible that an Anaconda weighs half what a Corvette weighs and yet has 50% more armour?
Is it plausible that taking a shield off an Adder and fitting it to an iCourier should make it stronger?

These things aren't a big deal as long as you're willing to accept that they're done for "gamey" reasons.
If you're going to assert there's some plausible reason for it to be the case, there should be evidence of it... cos that's what being "plausible" is all about.

 

[Stealthie]

As said above, since the gimballed version needs room and power for motor / servo it has less energy to charge your laser. Pretty simple.

Now you're just making stuff up.

We start off by speculating that the gimballed kinetic weapons use weaker ammo than fixed weapons because the mount can't handle the stress of the kinetic weapon but then, when that doesn't apply to lasers, we come up with an entirely different reason for the same effect to be in evidence?

 

[babelfisch]

Well, yes.

Just cos a stat' says something is the case doesn't mean it's plausible though.

Is it plausible that an Anaconda weighs half what a Corvette weighs and yet has 50% more armour?
Is it plausible that taking a shield off an Adder and fitting it to an iCourier should make it stronger?

These things aren't a big deal as long as you're willing to accept that they're done for "gamey" reasons.
If you're going to assert there's some plausible reason for it to be the case, there should be evidence of it... cos that's what being "plausible" is all about.

Sorry but it was you who brought realism into the argument and yet you didn't have a believable explanation why gimballed weapons aren't allowed to have less damage.

Now you're just making stuff up.

We start off by speculating that the gimballed kinetic weapons use weaker ammo than fixed weapons because the mount can't handle the stress of the kinetic weapon but then, when that doesn't apply to lasers, we come up with an entirely different reason for the same effect to be in evidence?

That's not what happened. I think you had his discussion with someone else.
Also, of course I am making stuff up! We are talking about imaginary space ships 1000 years in the future, the whole discussion is about making stuff up!

 

[Stealthie]

Sorry but it was you who brought realism into the argument and yet you didn't have a believable explanation why gimballed weapons aren't allowed to have less damage.

If I "brought realism into the argument" it was only as a result of pointing out that people cite "realism" as being the reason for it, which is nonsense.

I also haven't said gimbals "shouldn't be allowed to have less damage".
I'm quite happy to accept this is the case simply because the dev's deem it should be so.

Just don't try to tell me it's because gimballed cannons shoot different ammo to fixed cannons to avoid shaking themselves to bits and gimballed lasers are less powerful than fixed lasers because of a completely different reason.

 

[Mangal Oemie]

I love cannons. I have cannons on waaaaay too many ships, of all sizes from small to large ship, and all classes.

I am fine with the difference in shot speed. I used gimballed cannons on ships where fixed doesn't work (the imp Clipper and Cutter, primarily), and fixed elsewhere, and I think it is a fair trade-off.

Fixed cannon hits are more damaging and harder to aim, but when they hit it gives significant damage. Gimballed cannon shots hit almost always on short range, are super-easy to aim, but deal less damage per shot. I see no problem here.

Now.... if I could set a converge distance for fixed on wide ships, or have them fixed converging at 2 km or so.... I would only fly them fixed.

 

[babelfisch]

If I "brought realism into the argument" it was only as a result of pointing out that people cite "realism" as being the reason for it, which is nonsense.

I also haven't said gimbals "shouldn't be allowed to have less damage".
I'm quite happy to accept this is the case simply because the dev's deem it should be so.

Just don't try to tell me it's because gimballed cannons shoot different ammo to fixed cannons to avoid shaking themselves to bits and gimballed lasers are less powerful than fixed lasers because of a completely different reason.

Look at the first page, I quite clearly said that gimballed weapons make less damage for balancing reasons.

But when you pointed out that it's unrealistic that they do less damage I wanted to come up with some reasons why it's not unrealistic.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

The gimbaled/fixed weapons are balanced for PVP, otherwise everyone would be gimbaled scrubs, in fact even with the current data, gimbals still a bit OP because chaff being depleted way earlier then shield goes down.

 

[Pauciloquent]

Well here's my input.

Make it consistent between cannons, frag-cannons and multi-cannon.

Cannon (Gimballed): 900 m/s (All classes)

Cannon (Fixed): 1200 m/s (All classes)

Frag-Cannon (Gimballed): 600 m/s

Frag-Cannon (Fixed): 800 m/s

Multi-Cannon (Gimballed): 1200 m/s

Multi-Cannon (Fixed): 1600 m/s

Now all gimballed projectile weapons has 33.33333% slower velocity across the board.

OPTIONAL:

Plasma Accelerator: 1000 m/s (a little easier to use and a little harder to dodge, makes it a more compelling weapon to use)

Rail Gun: 6000 m/s (It's a projectile weapon not a laser)

 

[Stealthie]

The gimbaled/fixed weapons are balanced for PVP, otherwise everyone would be gimbaled scrubs, in fact even with the current data, gimbals still a bit OP because chaff being depleted way earlier then shield goes down.

Don't really see a problem with that.

Surely chaff should be a defensive tool, used to assist in escaping an attack?
It's a bit silly for people to expect to be able to make sustained use of chaff throughout any kind of prolonged combat.

 

[Limoncello Lizard]

I don't see the issue here.

You have a choice of weapons, both with pros and cons. Make one.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Don't really see a problem with that.

Surely chaff should be a defensive tool, used to assist in escaping an attack?
It's a bit silly for people to expect to be able to make sustained use of chaff throughout any kind of prolonged combat.

I am talking about 1v1, when chaff runs out, gimbals just keep on hammering the target without its ability to evade because of the assisted targeting, so it has to be some penalty for using gimbaled weapons. Right now, even with all the nurfs and penalities, gimbals have the advatage.

Again, its all balanced (at least fdev tries), for PvP fights not to have one meta build, and skill should be rewarded.

If we were talking PVE only, I think there would be no need for such balance, because people wouldn't compete with each other anyway.

 

[Threeofseven]

Only use fixed cannons. Gimbled cannons also have less ammo and they miss more than fixed in my experience. All other weapons gimbled dps will come out on top, but not with cannons.

 

[[VR] Merkir]

Silly thread.

Of course the gimballed cannon will have lower projectile speed and lower damage. For the same slot size it has to include the gimbal, gimbal motors, targeting, sensors, electronics, etc. The volume remaining for the firing energy able to be imparted to the projectile must be lower as a result.

/thread

 

[Stealthie]

I am talking about 1v1, when chaff runs out, gimbals just keep on hammering the target without its ability to evade because of the assisted targeting, so it has to be some penalty for using gimbaled weapons. Right now, even with all the nurfs and penalities, gimbals have the advatage.

Still not really seeing it.

You fly with fixed weapons you can shoot as much as you want with the caveat that you need to be able to aim.
As long as you can aim, you can deliver more damage to your target.

You fly with gimbals then it doesn't matter how good your aim is, you're still not going to be accurate if your target is dropping chaff.
And, even when they're not, your weapons aren't as powerful.

Seems pretty balanced to me.

What's not balanced is the expectation that chaff should provide you with some kind of continual benefit throughout a combat engagement.
That'd be kind of like hoping for an ECM which you could just leave powered-up constantly, or hoping for a ship that could constantly run cool enough to avoid a target lock.

That sort of thing would be great for some kind of "end-game" ship in a single-player game but you'd have to be pretty narrow-minded to think you were entitled to that kind of permanent advantage in a multi-player game.

 

[smiths121]

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.

I can explain the differnece, its magic, magic does it,

Hmm, just proved your point

Simon

 

[StiTch]

Don't really see a problem with that.

Surely chaff should be a defensive tool, used to assist in escaping an attack?
It's a bit silly for people to expect to be able to make sustained use of chaff throughout any kind of prolonged combat.

Please, allow me to weigh in.

Chaff is a pure and simple countermeasure to gimballed weapons. It has zero specificity towards escaping an attack; it should be considered an offset against gimbals, and choice/consequence is the very lifeblood of this game. Choose to use a weapon that a) aims for you and b) can fire at an angle, and there should be direct offsets and countermeasures to this.

In PvP it's a considerably hamstringed countermeasure/offset, in part because the survivability of builds is too damn high. Between two skilled opponents where one's build relies primarily on gimballed weapons, the game will be normally won by the gimballed player because the other guy ran out of chaff.

I can absolutely accept that a single chaff launcher should not spell indefinite invincibility against gimballed weaponry. But there are guys taking two or even three chaff launchers out, and the game still comes down to "baiting out his chaff ammo while evading direct conflict until you can let gimbals do all the work for you".

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Same goes for SCBs. I never was a big fan of this 'MMORPG-heal-potion mentality' behind. Shifts a good portion of skill towards dull button pressing - to gain what? Endless, 'epic' PvP fights that I even don't want to watch, let alone being involved in. That's probably the true reason behind why PvE is so crippled down, so that no one with just a little skill is really forced do use either of it.

SCB are just a part of the whole 20 minute shield meta.
Take 2 skilled pilots on an FDL and you get 20 min fights because the engineered shields are massive (prismatics/bi weaves).

If one goes all gimbaled MCs lets say, no amount of chaffs will be enough to counter the 20 min of auto aiming that gimbals bring to the fight. Skill should be rewarded, not auto aim. Anothet topic is the hounds/seakers that suffer from the same OP, but this is for another thread.

 

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

They didn't nerf gimballed cannons at all, they just buffed fixed cannons.
And if you think fixed cannons are that much better (which they are), then why not just equip them?

 

[Stealthie]

Please, allow me to weigh in.

Chaff is a pure and simple countermeasure to gimballed weapons.

And that makes gimbals "overpowered"?
And a "balanced" way to address this would be to have a countermeasure that renders them almost entirely useless the a all the time?

Come off it.

Fact is that, a lot of the time gimbals only remain locked within a tiny "window" near the point-of-aim anyway.
I can rarely just open up with the lasers on my cutter and see them track a target all the way to the edge of the screen.

Course, I notice that a lot of PvP currently seems to involve weapons that cause a ship to run so hot that it starts to take damage.
Maybe if PvPers stopped hammering high-heat weapons and, instead, fitted more modest weapons they wouldn't run so hot and they wouldn't be so easy to track with gimbals?

Seems like PvPers want to pursue these "insta-kill" weapons and they want to be able to indulge in "dogfighting" too - on the understanding that "dogfighting" presumably means being able to fly around their target unopposed while still being able to attack with any weapon.

You're building weapons which cause your ship to light up like an xmas tree, thermally, and then you get upset because you're easy to track so you fit chaff and then you moan that chaff doesn't completely undermine the effectiveness of gimbals.


Seriously, maybe it'd be worth fitting something like G5 Efficient MCs and lasers to one of your PvP ships and giving it a test against a less agile ship fitted with gimbals?
I suspect FDev have attempted to give PvPers options but it seems like most of them are "addicted" to insta-kill weapons so they're ignoring alternative tactical choices.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

And that makes gimbals "overpowered"?
And a "balanced" way to address this would be to have a countermeasure that renders them almost entirely useless the a all the time?

Come off it.

Fact is that, a lot of the time gimbals only remain locked within a tiny "window" near the point-of-aim anyway.
I can rarely just open up with the lasers on my cutter and see them track a target all the way to the edge of the screen.

Course, I notice that a lot of PvP currently seems to involve weapons that cause a ship to run so hot that it starts to take damage.
Maybe if PvPers stopped hammering high-heat weapons and, instead, fitted more modest weapons they wouldn't run so hot and they wouldn't be so easy to track with gimbals?

Seems like PvPers want to pursue these "insta-kill" weapons and they want to be able to indulge in "dogfighting" too - on the understanding that "dogfighting" presumably means being able to fly around their target unopposed while still being able to attack with any weapon.

You're building weapons which cause your ship to light up like an xmas tree, thermally, and then you get upset because you're easy to track so you fit chaff and then you moan that chaff doesn't completely undermine the effectiveness of gimbals.


Seriously, maybe it'd be worth fitting something like G5 Efficient MCs and lasers to one of your PvP ships and giving it a test against a less agile ship fitted with gimbals?
I suspect FDev have attempted to give PvPers options but it seems like most of them are "addicted" to insta-kill weapons so they're ignoring alternative tactical choices.

Oh wow, come back when you had at least one PVP fight because what you wrote proves you have no idea on the subject (which is ok if you dont partake in it).

Refer to my 20min fight reply above.