My take on the Big Ships Problem: Broadsides

[JeffRyan]

In one of the cutter threads someone mentioned the problem being attributed to it 'not being a dog fighter in a dogfighting game'. And I think that is the long and short of something that itches for me with the Anaconda, Corvette and Cutter. These ships shouldn't be dog fighters or forced to use dogfighting tactics. They (in my opinion) should have on or two big front facing weapons with the rest being broadsides or turrets.

It'd bring a beautiful dynamic and realism to what these ships should be.

 

[sam445]

I agree. Having large ships gain a bonus to turrets usage would be great.

 

[JeffRyan]

I agree. Having large ships gain a bonus to turrets usage would be great.

Yeah these large beasties, purely due to inertia should have difficulty maneuvering. Yet they're forced to because of the dog-fighting dynamic of the ED game. That's something that if changed could allow for variants of combat other than dogfighting but more like naval battles.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Reducing 3 dimensional 0g combat to 2d medieval naval warfare is not a solution, it's a "I don't know what do to so I'm gonna stick with what I know" bandaid.

Broadsiding is an equally efficient method of sinking the ship you're firing from when you are outmaneuvered. This is why one of the most common naval tactics was to run until you got the positional advantage. Making the larger ships rely on broadsiding or turrets is just begging for them to be rendered completely useless against anything more maneuverable.

The problem is that ships like the Cutter and Corvette aren't meant to fly unsupported. You're not supposed to be dogfighting the enemy, your support is there to do that while you take your time and nail them harder than they can compensate for.

People just need to change what they think they know about playing the game.

 

[Yokoshima]

In one of the cutter threads someone mentioned the problem being attributed to it 'not being a dog fighter in a dogfighting game'. And I think that is the long and short of something that itches for me with the Anaconda, Corvette and Cutter. These ships shouldn't be dog fighters or forced to use dogfighting tactics. They (in my opinion) should have on or two big front facing weapons with the rest being broadsides or turrets.

It'd bring a beautiful dynamic and realism to what these ships should be.

It would be nice, but imposable as long as all ships have access to the same modules, just slightly varying caliber and strength. Because large ships recharge shields at the same rate, don't have much more hull, and don't have many more total hard points, anything an un-agile ship can use an agile one will use much better.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Reducing 3 dimensional 0g combat to 2d medieval naval warfare is not a solution, it's a "I don't know what do to so I'm gonna stick with what I know" bandaid.

Broadsiding is an equally efficient method of sinking the ship you're firing from when you are outmaneuvered. This is why one of the most common naval tactics was to run until you got the positional advantage. Making the larger ships rely on broadsiding or turrets is just begging for them to be rendered completely useless against anything more maneuverable.

The problem is that ships like the Cutter and Corvette aren't meant to fly unsupported. You're not supposed to be dogfighting the enemy, your support is there to do that while you take your time and nail them harder than they can compensate for.

People just need to change what they think they know about playing the game.

This solo player base is quite large. Arguably the largest. Even from the games creation the want for a solo game was so strong that they added a solo mode as a promise to the founders. As a result no ship is meant to be group only. Some may do better in a wing, sure. But all are supposed to be viable solo. That is why the Corvette can kill almost as fast as a FDL.

 

[CariadocThorne]

In one of the cutter threads someone mentioned the problem being attributed to it 'not being a dog fighter in a dogfighting game'. And I think that is the long and short of something that itches for me with the Anaconda, Corvette and Cutter. These ships shouldn't be dog fighters or forced to use dogfighting tactics. They (in my opinion) should have on or two big front facing weapons with the rest being broadsides or turrets.

It'd bring a beautiful dynamic and realism to what these ships should be.

When I watched a youtube reviewof the cutter, my first thought was that it needs to be fitted with turrets in most of the non-huge mounts. Fit all 4 top mounts (2 med, 2 large) with laser turrets (pulse, burst, beam, not sure what the distributor would handle), then fit the 3 underside mounts (1 huge, 2 med) with player controlled weapons, Or even turn the lower 2 medium into turrets as well, only leaving the huge under direct player control. The players job is now to fly like a capital ship. You don't worry about lining up individual shots, you concentrate on keeping your top facing the priority enemy so the turrets can fire, and on deciding when to leave the turrets firing at will, and when to focus them on a particular target.

 

[cluelessforumuser65578]

In one of the cutter threads someone mentioned the problem being attributed to it 'not being a dog fighter in a dogfighting game'. And I think that is the long and short of something that itches for me with the Anaconda, Corvette and Cutter. These ships shouldn't be dog fighters or forced to use dogfighting tactics. They (in my opinion) should have on or two big front facing weapons with the rest being broadsides or turrets.

It'd bring a beautiful dynamic and realism to what these ships should be.

hopefully when we have all the planned ships, panther clipper and a couple of saud kruger are left? fd can start to come up with bigger ships that dont rely on pitch to fight. besides, even if fd changed anaconda, corvette and cutter to do what you want, what would be the point? we are stuck in a chair with a poor field of view so all the shooting would still have to be done by the ai

 

[cluelessforumuser65578]

Reducing 3 dimensional 0g combat to 2d medieval naval warfare is not a solution, it's a "I don't know what do to so I'm gonna stick with what I know" bandaid.

Broadsiding is an equally efficient method of sinking the ship you're firing from when you are outmaneuvered. This is why one of the most common naval tactics was to run until you got the positional advantage. Making the larger ships rely on broadsiding or turrets is just begging for them to be rendered completely useless against anything more maneuverable.

The problem is that ships like the Cutter and Corvette aren't meant to fly unsupported. You're not supposed to be dogfighting the enemy, your support is there to do that while you take your time and nail them harder than they can compensate for.

People just need to change what they think they know about playing the game.

when he said broadside im sure he meant the ability to engage a target coming in from any angle. not just fire at a target of the port bow lol

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

It would be nice, but imposable as long as all ships have access to the same modules, just slightly varying caliber and strength. Because large ships recharge shields at the same rate, don't have much more hull, and don't have many more total hard points, anything an un-agile ship can use an agile one will use much better.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



This solo player base is quite large. Arguably the largest. Even from the games creation the want for a solo game was so strong that they added a solo mode as a promise to the founders. As a result no ship is meant to be group only. Some may do better in a wing, sure. But all are supposed to be viable solo. That is why the Corvette can kill almost as fast as a FDL.

The solo player base can launch AI fighters.

 

[Quineloe]

The problem is that ships like the Cutter and Corvette aren't meant to fly unsupported. You're not supposed to be dogfighting the enemy, your support is there to do that while you take your time and nail them harder than they can compensate for.

Too bad there's no content in the game for this to make sense. Except PVP of course.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

when he said broadside im sure he meant the ability to engage a target coming in from any angle. not just fire at a target of the port bow lol

Except that's not what broadside means. At all, and turrets already fire at targets in huge arcs.

You may be horribly mistaken.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Too bad there's no content in the game for this to make sense. Except PVP of course.

Combat Zones are the epitome of such content, actually.

 

[ParanoidNdroid]

Reducing 3 dimensional 0g combat to 2d medieval naval warfare is not a solution, it's a "I don't know what do to so I'm gonna stick with what I know" bandaid.

Broadsiding is an equally efficient method of sinking the ship you're firing from when you are outmaneuvered. This is why one of the most common naval tactics was to run until you got the positional advantage. Making the larger ships rely on broadsiding or turrets is just begging for them to be rendered completely useless against anything more maneuverable.

The problem is that ships like the Cutter and Corvette aren't meant to fly unsupported. You're not supposed to be dogfighting the enemy, your support is there to do that while you take your time and nail them harder than they can compensate for.

People just need to change what they think they know about playing the game.

I completely agree.. sir The Cutter and Corvette should be the hammers in a toolbox of destruction not the Crescent wrench... I see corvettes and cutters soon rocking a lot of forward locked weapons designed to finish off targets not engage in Dogfighting.. kinda like the shield aircraft carrier Has many weapons but utilizes small craft to deter direct engagement..

 

[Quineloe]

Combat Zones are the epitome of such content, actually.

You mean where small fighters have no business because their tiny weapons take forever to rip apart those military grade armored and HRE strengthened dope ships while I can solo an entire CZ in my Corvette because all the wingmen are already provided by the AI spawns?

No, Conflict Zones are a terrible, immersion breaking place holder content. I will not let those count.

 

[cluelessforumuser65578]

Except that's not what broadside means. At all, and turrets already fire at targets in huge arcs.

You may be horribly mistaken.

horribly mistaken about what? lol

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

You mean where small fighters have no business because their tiny weapons take forever to rip apart those military grade armored and HRE strengthened dope ships while I can solo an entire CZ in my Corvette because all the wingmen are already provided by the AI spawns?

No, Conflict Zones are a terrible, immersion breaking place holder content. I will not let those count.

No debate there, but large ships are for large conflicts. If you're using a Cutter to solo hunt pirates in a RES you're flying the wrong ship. All of this means that the problem isn't the ship, it's the game that the ship is supposed to be used in. NPC fighters will happen someday, and that'll give those ships a sliver of new purpose, but until then they're the new Orcas of the ED Universe with no content to make them worth flying.

 

[CariadocThorne]

No debate there, but large ships are for large conflicts. If you're using a Cutter to solo hunt pirates in a RES you're flying the wrong ship. All of this means that the problem isn't the ship, it's the game that the ship is supposed to be used in. NPC fighters will happen someday, and that'll give those ships a sliver of new purpose, but until then they're the new Orcas of the ED Universe with no content to make them worth flying.

I wouldn't be surprised if player piloted fighter while the AI flies the main ship (with turrets blazing away merrily of course) happened first. Having the AI fly your big lumbering ship along in a pretty straight line towards its destination is a lot easier to script than flying a small agile fighter in a convincing defensive pattern.

 

[Yokoshima]

The solo player base can launch AI fighters.

Which, based on them in CZs, are useless. And they will be limited. So PvE players will be going back to restock every few minuets. Now if we had AI wings with NPCs we hired...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

You mean where small fighters have no business because their tiny weapons take forever to rip apart those military grade armored and HRE strengthened dope ships while I can solo an entire CZ in my Corvette because all the wingmen are already provided by the AI spawns?

No, Conflict Zones are a terrible, immersion breaking place holder content. I will not let those count.

Small(er) fighters with a few C2 multi-cannons can take out a conda/FGS/FDS/FAS/Clipper/etc. with great efficiency. They struggle more vs shields, but are often much more adept at PP sniping. There is a reason the Vulture/FD/GS (in the right hands)/Python/FAS/Clipper/Corvette/Conda/FDL/etc. are about the same in almost every combat situation. The FDL is probably on top in every combat situation right now, but not by a whole lot. And admittedly ships like the FD/GS and the Conda are not the best choices for undermining due to poor SC agility, but they make up for it by being slightly better in CZs.

 

[Quineloe]

No debate there, but large ships are for large conflicts. If you're using a Cutter to solo hunt pirates in a RES you're flying the wrong ship. All of this means that the problem isn't the ship, it's the game that the ship is supposed to be used in. NPC fighters will happen someday, and that'll give those ships a sliver of new purpose, but until then they're the new Orcas of the ED Universe with no content to make them worth flying.

I disagree

The Corvette is great against large pirate ships

[video=youtube;cmMcOe0BWo8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmMcOe0BWo8[/video]

Small(er) fighters with a few C2 multi-cannons can take out a conda/FGS/FDS/FAS/Clipper/etc. with great efficiency. They struggle more vs shields, but are often much more adept at PP sniping.

So everyone is shooting the big ships while hoping the NPCs will take out the Vipers, Cobras and Vultures for them. A+

 

[Daffan]

The problem is that every ship tries to do the same thing currently - fighting at 500 meters.

This is why small ships suck so bad in this game. There is no niche or role for them.

You cant be an interceptor, there is no logistics or EWAR - there is no sniping or dedicated craft. Everything is vying for 500m dogfighter. It's horrible long-term design

They've got planned obsolescence in their own sandbox.

 

[Hamakua]

By that extension to make broadsides viable you would have to either rework the weapon hierarchy completely or do a serious revision on the balancing of turrets at the higher classes.

Right now it breaks down as follows

Fixed > Gimballed >> Turrets.

Turrets don't offer nearly enough of an advantage in targeting to compensate for their 3rd class damage - all other things being equal (weapon type and class).

The limited FOV in some (not all) ships also would have to be re-worked or the UI would have to be to be to denote when you have a firing solution with what weapons - and if there were friendlies in the way.

"Broadside" type gameplay is best served with a side of 3rd person view. Think Homeworld or that new dreadnought game. But I don't know if you want to open that can of worms.