The biggest thing that is off with ED

[Erimus Kamzel]

I actually dislike games that portray larger ships being able to spin on a dime. That's the main reason I'm not a big fan of Limit Theory right now, as his ships don't seem to have a sense of mass.

But as most have pointed out, that's why turrets exist, in reality and in Elite, so you don't have to steer the larger ships to target the smaller annoyances.

I agree, watching someone fly a ship the size of an Anaconda as if it were a fighter does look ridiculous as the OP pointed out. The g-forces involved when doing that would be unbearable to its occupants and put massive stresses on its superstructure.

But bare in mind its currently a one man ship so those flying them have little choice other than to do the aiming and firing themselves, or rely on auto-turrets which aren't as effective it seems. Once those ships become multicrewed, especially with skilled human gunners who can man the turrets, hopefully we'll see them being flown in a more sensible manner (akin to one of the earlier kickstarter videos where Anacondas in a convoy are being attacked by Vipers but don't go trying to out-fly their opponents). Implementing more G-force stresses and mass may still be needed to "encourage" players flying the big heavy ships to begin relying more on heavy defensive firepower and skilled npc/player gunners.

 

[Vandaahl]

Who the hell approved COB's forum account..?

 

[Commander Debic]

How on earth can it be silly? Have you ever seen a real weapons system? This is a nice example of a gimbaled weapon.

The whole vehicle needs to face it's target. It doesn't have a turret.

Poor anology TBH, modern tanks have full 360 degree horizontal rotation of gun turrets and a large amount of vertical movement also.

 

[Commander Debic]

Care to enlighten us on what vehicles those might be? Other than maybe tanks or Humvees most combat vehicles that come to mind have fixed weapons unless manned by someone other than the pilot. Attack jets and helicopters come to mind...

What about rotational weapons on ships of the worlds navies? Not supporting the OP but there are often fully rotational weapons on land vehicles, and ships, some rotation even on attack helicopter guns and Bomber aircraft.

 

[Stoo]

I want wall hacks, instagib and aimbots.

 

[Commander Debic]

I like ED the way it is though, but would like a little more work done on the Conda's turrets.

 

[Zvanya]

But SC has perfectly reasonable weapon systems that can be moved around just like on every vehicle ever in real life.
Moving your entire ship like it's a part of a weapon that needs to be aligned with the target is just silly.

Never heard of the A-10 Warthog? It's an aircraft wrapped around a 6 barrel 30mm cannon, and yes you have to point the vehicle at the target. Troll more.

 

[Iskariot]

Moving your entire ship like it's a part of a weapon that needs to be aligned with the target is just silly.

This is utter nonsense. It depends on the weapon. This has already been explained.

For example have a look at the the A10's primary weapon: the 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling-type cannon.

EDIT: aaaggh Zvanya was here first

 

[Witzo]

Ships move like they are a fixed part of the weapon instead of weapons moving and tracking as needed and able, depending on ship's size.

I don't agree with that at all
[Redacted]

It happens in today's military. Jet fighters have a fixed gun. The A10 is built around a big fixed gun. Gimballed weapons are mostly large, unwieldy tank guns and ship deck guns. Apache helicopters fire many unguided missiles. This game is dog fighting in space, WW2 style.

 

[ScottGust]

Complete reading comprehension fail?

Hey redacted dude, wrong forum..maybe ur problem is karma, my ship n weapons move in perfect harmony.

 

[Commander Debic]

Ships move like they are a fixed part of the weapon instead of weapons moving and tracking as needed and able, depending on ship's size.

I don't agree with that at all
[Redacted]

Oh look what's happened. Perhaps if you respected forum rules and moderation this wouldn't have happened. Don'tcha think?

 

[Some Useless Geek]

A Chill Pill Called For, Methinks...

You folks need to re-read your responses before hitting the [Submit Reply] button. Perhaps drink a full glass of water before doing so? Your second edit might possess a superior light to heat ratio <cough>.

Let's get back to the topic at hand: turreted weapons. I think we can all agree that the gimballed weapon aiming seems to be working fairly well. It's the utterly useless turrets that have everyone's panties in a twist. Frontier need to tell us what their plans are for turret accuracy and overall weapon impact.

As a side note to this discussion I'd like to point out that automatic weapon aiming should always choose to hold fire if a friendly gets into the weapon CEP cone. It is completely ridiculous to think that a spacecraft fire control system can't tell blue from red, and even more so to think that it would willingly choose to fire when there is any possibility of blue-on-blue damage. Would this not make sense?

 

[SuperG]

How on earth can it be silly? Have you ever seen a real weapons system? This is a nice example of a gimbaled weapon.

The whole vehicle needs to face it's target. It doesn't have a turret.

I always wondered where these " gimbal" dscusion go over. No zi ot clear picture in mind.
This example is a heavy anti tank tank or mobile artilery.

So to me gimbaled main weapons are the heavy once ment to attack equal to bigger targets. While turrets are for more agile or much agile smaller targets.

This means a front turret on a corvette is used against fighters. It main fixed or gimbaled canon against other big ships.

While dreadnaught with a huge space honkin extra large main cannon as turret or gimbaled or fixed to attack bigger ships.

Fixed main guns is more like a ship build around a heavy guns.

A A10A warthog as a example of flying gatling canon.

Often for gameplay balanse they give meium size ships no turrets. For more rock paper scissor gameplay beteen classes.

Gimbaled make also sense if the fixed guns are mounted far away from each other. I noticed that in game the guns lock on target automattic focusing on it.

For agile combat like dogfighting a high fire rate is normaly used.

 

[Thunderchief]

You folks need to re-read your responses before hitting the [Submit Reply] button. Perhaps drink a full glass of water before doing so? Your second edit might possess a superior light to heat ratio <cough>.

Let's get back to the topic at hand: turreted weapons. I think we can all agree that the gimballed weapon aiming seems to be working fairly well. It's the utterly useless turrets that have everyone's panties in a twist. Frontier need to tell us what their plans are for turret accuracy and overall weapon impact.

As a side note to this discussion I'd like to point out that automatic weapon aiming should always choose to hold fire if a friendly gets into the weapon CEP cone. It is completely ridiculous to think that a spacecraft fire control system can't tell blue from red, and even more so to think that it would willingly choose to fire when there is any possibility of blue-on-blue damage. Would this not make sense?

Yes I agree, the turrets seem to need boosting in intelligence and effectiveness. I was fighting against a Anaconda a while ago, and the moves it was making seemed very unrealistic, it manoeuvred like a much smaller ship.

Ideally to my mind the Anaconda should have mostly turrets, and perhaps one or two primary weapons for attacking other similar sized or larger ships.

Cheers

 

[psykokow]

This thread has resurged for no real reason.

Its just going to restart bickering.

The gimbal system is under constant review with each build of the game.

It will develop, please use the ticketing system to report your concerns and ideas about the current release of gimball.