Should we have Huge and Large Turrets for big ships ?
- Thread starter coca_fr
- Start date
Considering that IRL all the really big guns were mounted into turrets (battleship and cruiser guns, f'rex, but railroad artillery was also frequently turreted) it actually makes more sense that big guns be mounted onto turrets. Anything too big to manhandle into position was mounted on a turret because it was the only real way to aim it.
Even tracked SPG's (the biggest guns usually deployed with land armies) usually have turret mountings these days for maximum versatility. The only exception of any size are weapons that are targeting really big targets (such as the German "Paris Guns" that only had to hit somewhere in a city).
So yes, there should be Large and Huge turrets. The question is should there be Large and Huge gimballed or fixed, because really large caliber guns are almost never deployed in that way.
Even tracked SPG's (the biggest guns usually deployed with land armies) usually have turret mountings these days for maximum versatility. The only exception of any size are weapons that are targeting really big targets (such as the German "Paris Guns" that only had to hit somewhere in a city).
So yes, there should be Large and Huge turrets. The question is should there be Large and Huge gimballed or fixed, because really large caliber guns are almost never deployed in that way.
Last edited:
Kind of counters the rest of your turret claims, right? The current C4 weapons (and C3 multi's) are pretty easy to get into position.
If we ever get truely huge ships, your argument will make sense. But we're not there yet.
I'm not opposed to more turrets, though.
Don't really see why we don't have all weapons in all formats.
There's already a variety of penalties attached to gimballed and turreted weapons whereby they're more expensive than fixed weapons, weigh more and use more power (which is reasonable) and less powerful than fixed weapons (which makes no sense at all).
That being the case, it seems a bit harsh to flat-out deny people the use of various weapons unless they opt for fixed variants on top of the existing penalties.
There's already a variety of penalties attached to gimballed and turreted weapons whereby they're more expensive than fixed weapons, weigh more and use more power (which is reasonable) and less powerful than fixed weapons (which makes no sense at all).
That being the case, it seems a bit harsh to flat-out deny people the use of various weapons unless they opt for fixed variants on top of the existing penalties.