Turret Nerfs are Overdoing it Guys.

[Sunleader]

Guys not be an Annoyance.
But would you be so Kind and stop Nerfing Turrets into Oblivion ever Further ?

I still remember Times when my Class 3 Turrets managed to Drag 2-3 Percent of an Viper Hull with each Hit.
By now (given they Hit at all because by now anything below 1km or higher than 2km is basicly an Miss Chance of 50-90%) I can be happy if they do 1% with 2-3 Hits.

Do you know how Hilarious it is when an Ship with Class 2 Fixed Weapons goes Head to Head with you and s your Class 7 Shield in a Single Approach and drag you down to 80% Hull with 3-4 Hits while your Class 3 Turrets are barely managing to even Drop the Class 4 Shield of the Enemy Ship ?



Guys if you want an Class 4 Fighter to be Equal to an Class 7 Korvette then Drop the Prices of the Higher Tiered Ships to less than a Million Credits as well and just drop the whole Class Weapons thing all together.
To begin with 1vs1 the Fighters always had an Edge anyways. Because they could Spam Chaffs and were more maneuverable allowing to stay out of the main Firing Arcs of Gimballed Weapons
But by now its so Bad that using an Bigger Ship for Combat is basicly Impossible because your not maneuverable enough to use Fixed Weapons and anything else is just not dealing Damage and Hits anymore.

An Viper with Class 2 and 1 Fixed Weapons will do nearly Twice the Damage of an Turret Equipped Imperial Clipper.
Price for an Turret Equipped Clipper about 100 Million
Price for an Fixed Equipped Viper about 1 Million.


Thats not funny Guys...
If you want Bigger Ships to not be used Remove them From the Game Entirely together with the Turreted Weapons.
But stop forcing them to be Incapable Fighters....

 

[Lestat]

There pros and cons to each and every ship and each ship has a weakness.

 

[DragoonKnight]

The Clipper is a very manueverable ship. Were you trying to say Cutter?

1. Replace the turrets on your clipper with gimballed weapons.
2. Kill Vipers all day long with no effort
3. ???
4. Profit

P.S. Yes, turrets are crap for anything bigger than an Eagle.

 

[CTCParadox]

If big ships actually turned slow enough to be forced to rely on turrets this might be a problem.
But the Clipper in particular is pretty agile. No need for turrets.

CMDR CTCParadox

 

[Sunleader]

There pros and cons to each and every ship and each ship has a weakness.

Ah and which Pros would that be for the Bigger Ships ?
Being an Bigger Target ?
Having less Firepower as they cannot bring Fixed or even Gimballed Guns to Bear ?
Or maybe their Energy which is Depleted just as fast as that of an Fighter ?
Maybe its Shields which have hardly any Difference to Fighters as well because they have to Shield an Larger Mass and thus end up depleted very fast ?
Ah let me Guess. Its the Higher Cost for Repairs and Rebuy on Death as well as on Equipment making the Ship far more Expensive while not really being worth it.


Mate no Offense but Big Ships with Turrets do right now have not a Single Pro above Fighters.
Right now Fighter vs Bigger Ship = Fighter Wins.

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

The Clipper is a very manueverable ship. Were you trying to say Cutter?

1. Replace the turrets on your clipper with gimballed weapons.
2. Kill Vipers all day long with no effort
3. ???
4. Profit

P.S. Yes, turrets are crap for anything bigger than an Eagle.

I was talking about Bigger Ships in General.
The Clipper being among the more Maneuverable Ships with Large Size might be an Bad Example.
Albeit while Gimballed Weapons might Work on NPCs. You wont stand much Chance against an Halfwat Skilled Fighter Pilot as you will simply not have himself in your Firing Arcs for most of the Time while Blasting Holes into you with Fixed Weapons like Railguns and Plasma Accs.
And here we have not yet Talked about Chaffs.

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

If big ships actually turned slow enough to be forced to rely on turrets this might be a problem.
But the Clipper in particular is pretty agile. No need for turrets.

CMDR CTCParadox

Yeah.
And now tell that to an Cobra which Turns Circles around you if it wants.

 

[DragoonKnight]

Ah and which Pros would that be for the Bigger Ships ?
Being an Bigger Target ?
Having less Firepower as they cannot bring Fixed or even Gimballed Guns to Bear ?
Or maybe their Energy which is Depleted just as fast as that of an Fighter ?
Maybe its Shields which have hardly any Difference to Fighters as well because they have to Shield an Larger Mass and thus end up depleted very fast ?
Ah let me Guess. Its the Higher Cost for Repairs and Rebuy on Death as well as on Equipment making the Ship far more Expensive while not really being worth it.


Mate no Offense but Big Ships with Turrets do right now have not a Single Pro above Fighters.
Right now Fighter vs Bigger Ship = Fighter Wins.

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




I was talking about Bigger Ships in General.
The Clipper being among the more Maneuverable Ships with Large Size might be an Bad Example.
Albeit while Gimballed Weapons might Work on NPCs. You wont stand much Chance against an Halfwat Skilled Fighter Pilot as you will simply not have himself in your Firing Arcs for most of the Time while Blasting Holes into you with Fixed Weapons like Railguns and Plasma Accs.
And here we have not yet Talked about Chaffs.

Then do not use turrets. My Conda and Clipper work great with gimballed.

 

[Universal Evil]

Then do not use turrets. My Conda and Clipper work great with gimballed.

one could also argue that if Fdev chooses to nerf any asspect of the game like in this example the turrets, why not just delete them all together, why have an option in the game that next to nobody uses ?? The same could be said for the wake scanners or misiles or even the ugly Orca ship. It seems like those options only are made so that one could say we have so and so many options to choose from, even though some of the option are pointless... pure sales talk, not worth anything. Imagine a salesman of real jetplains argue to the customers, You should by our plain because ours has more options to add on than others do, ours can have a towbar mounted with a trailer... nice but who the H... wants a trailer on there jetplain ? nobody but it's nice to have the option right

 

[CTCParadox]

Yeah.
And now tell that to an Cobra which Turns Circles around you if it wants.

Then you fly backwards and win.

CMDR CTCParadox

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

I'm really amused right now. Practically all who have posted have actually agreed that turrets are not very useful. But then argue to simply not use them ? In that case they can really be removed from the game. How about focusing on how to make them useful ? And yes, for the time being I've switched to gimbals even on my Cutter, because turrets just did not do any good. And it works, barely, at least in PvE. I'd still prefer that turrets be brought to a point where they make sense.

 

[Sunleader]

Then do not use turrets. My Conda and Clipper work great with gimballed.

How about No ?
Mate Gimballed Works Fine as long as Enemy is NPC.
Players unfortunately are not that Stupid as to Stay within your Firing Arc for long when they got an more Maneuverable Ship.
And for the Short times they Cross your Arc they Throw you a Chaff making your Gimballed Guns useless for that Time Window.
(Actually by now even NPCs do that pretty often just not as coordinated...)

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

one could also argue that if Fdev chooses to nerf any asspect of the game like in this example the turrets, why not just delete them all together, why have an option in the game that next to nobody uses ?? The same could be said for the wake scanners or misiles or even the ugly Orca ship. It seems like those options only are made so that one could say we have so and so many options to choose from, even though some of the option are pointless... pure sales talk, not worth anything. Imagine a salesman of real jetplains argue to the customers, You should by our plain because ours has more options to add on than others do, ours can have a towbar mounted with a trailer... nice but who the H... wants a trailer on there jetplain ? nobody but it's nice to have the option right

Problem is they would have use.
Its just that they are making them useless....

Ships are Castrated to make everything into an Fighter.
An 700 Ton Ship has only like 3 times the Power of an 70 Ton Ship and out of that 60% of the Additional Power is eaten by Bigger Systems
Right now if your Flying something Big your basicly an Oversized and Overexpensive Fighter with less Maneuverability.

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

Then you fly backwards and win.

CMDR CTCParadox

If you want to Kill NPCs you can do simpler things than flying Backwards.
Against an Player that wont work as he will simply fly forward and turn around you without flight assist as he is 3 faster forward than your backwards.

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

I'm really amused right now. Practically all who have posted have actually agreed that turrets are not very useful. But then argue to simply not use them ? In that case they can really be removed from the game. How about focusing on how to make them useful ? And yes, for the time being I've switched to gimbals even on my Cutter, because turrets just did not do any good. And it works, barely, at least in PvE. I'd still prefer that turrets be brought to a point where they make sense.

Thanks so someone actually got a use for his Head aside from using it as an Rest for his Hat.
Yes. Turrets are Useless and this needs to be Changed.
An Corvette which Costs 200.000 Million Credits just to be Bought. Should not be Castrated so its Forced to Fly like an Fighter that Costs not even 10% of this Price given your A-Grading everything....

 

[Universal Evil]

Btw is there any explanation as to why turret mounted weapons should be any weaker than the fixed or gimballed weapons ??? I mean it's the same gun, same bullet which come out and hit the other ships the only difference is that the fixed cannot move while the others can move their direction of fire without the ship altering its path... It seems very unreal to me in a game that tries to be as realistic as possible, not considering that humans flying around all over our galaxy is not the most plausible scenery one could imagine....

 

[Sunleader]

Btw is there any explanation as to why turret mounted weapons should be any weaker than the fixed or gimballed weapons ??? I mean it's the same gun, same bullet which come out and hit the other ships the only difference is that the fixed cannot move while the others can move their direction of fire without the ship altering its path... It seems very unreal to me in a game that tries to be as realistic as possible, not considering that humans flying around all over our galaxy is not the most plausible scenery one could imagine....

None.
Its an Pure Balancing Measure taken to make Turret Weapons Weaker and Reward Players who are Aiming themselves.
Turrets give you an Option to largely avoid Enemies outmaneuvering you. So if they were as Strong as Gimballed or Fixed Weapons. There would be no Reason to not use Turret Weapons.


Honestly said an much easier and better way for this would to Simply Define Turret Slots with Preset Turret Arcs and Forward Gun Slots right from the Start.
Ships should have Slots which actually represents their Design and Class.

Small and Medium Fighters should not have Turret Slots and only Limited Gimballed Slots.
For example the Cobra should have its two Class 2 Slots as Fixed and the two Class 1 Slots as Possible Gimballed
While an Eagle should only have Fixed Slots from the Start
An Heavy Fighter should have Gimballed and maybe a few Turret Slot.
An ASP Explorer for example should have maybe 2 Turret Slots with Arcs to the Rear and remaining Weapons Gimballed Front.
Gunships Should have an even Mix of Gimballed Weapons and Turrets
The Federal Gunships for example should have 2-3 Medium Gimballed Slots and 4 Small Turret Slots with Arcs Facing to its Sides.
Transports and Corvettes should have mostly Turret Slots
The Cutter for example should have 1 Heavy Front Gun and 8 Turrets (2 Large 2 Medium 4 Small) with preset Arcs (meaning they wont be able to all Fire on same Target)


Unlike Fighters which are from the Start are doing Attack Runs. (Head at Target and Fire Everything you have in a Short Time Window before you Pass the Target)
An Corvette should not be doing Attack Runs but Rather Strafing Runs. (Strafing towards and Target Diagonally attempting to Bear as Many Guns as Possible on it while Maintaining Distance to avoid the Enemy getting into your Weaker Areas)

Currently Elite Dangerous is basicly only an Big Fighter Game.
There is nothing else than Fighters.
We got some stuff Called Gunships or Corvettes.
But right now this is in Name Only.
Because in terms of Combat Style and Abilitys its all just Fighters anyways.

 

[metatheurgist]

Btw is there any explanation as to why turret mounted weapons should be any weaker than the fixed or gimballed weapons ??? I mean it's the same gun, same bullet which come out and hit the other ships the only difference is that the fixed cannot move while the others can move their direction of fire without the ship altering its path... It seems very unreal to me in a game that tries to be as realistic as possible, not considering that humans flying around all over our galaxy is not the most plausible scenery one could imagine....

Of course there is. You have a class "x" volume of space to make a weapon. You can put in 100% weapon, or you can add bits that make it swivel, or bits that make it swivel a lot and track targets. The more space you use for swivelly bits the less space you have for weapon bits.

 

[trader4u]

yes you are right, the bigger ships should have more powerfull turrets, afterall biggerships=more room for higher grade powerplants, witch would translate into more powerful weapons.
i wonder how much a capital class battleship would suffer from having turreted weapons, those things should be able to vaporize small viper sized ships instantly.
i never use turrets, on my clipper, i have used em on a type 6, but for pure defensive matters.

 

[jay3141592]

I found the turrets pointless as well. I thought they'd fit my CMDR's style - I wanted it to be a rare goods trader, so relying on "automated" defenses and paying a premium for it while equipping ships. But none of the weaponry available fits - turrets are essentially one class lower than gimballed weapons and still cost more; torpedoes and missiles are, well, and don't get me started on mines.

Given that turrets are so expensive, their lack of firepower is really disappointing. On a largeish transporter, they should make someone trying to simply stick to your behind think twice.

 

[Mr_sukebe]

I'm really amused right now. Practically all who have posted have actually agreed that turrets are not very useful. But then argue to simply not use them ? In that case they can really be removed from the game. How about focusing on how to make them useful ? And yes, for the time being I've switched to gimbals even on my Cutter, because turrets just did not do any good. And it works, barely, at least in PvE. I'd still prefer that turrets be brought to a point where they make sense.

Agreed.
If the unanimous view of players is to stop using turrets, then it's because they're underpowered and need a boost.
BTW, I have no big ships and nothing with turrets, so it's no that I'm asking for my own benefit, this is just simple logic.

 

[Space Time]

Hello All, "Space Time" here...
I've been gone a long time (maybe 8-9 months) and so much has changed, that my comments may be weak, yet of historic significance.

B-17 thinking...
When I think of turrets, I don't think of them as having value other than deterrent in nature, yet could hold off or down a single fighter.
25 missions was what those B-17 crews would have to live through during WW2, yet there were more downed by Flak, than there were downed by fighters. This means that of those 25 near impossible number of missions to survive through, that, "that number" (25) could be cut down to less than half that amount of losses... We don't have bases that need heavy hitting large spacecraft as the B-17 was designed to do, yet the "Flying Fortress" is still what large ships are thought to be, unless they are as many have said here, "Just a larger fighter ship".

Myself being out of it for a while now, my question is, "are the turrets a deterrent", and if so, "how much of deterrent are they?"

From what all I've read here, a single fighter has a better chance than that of any large ship with turreted fire power. If this is true, then I do think that the turrets need to be buffed up until a single fighter can't easily kill one, yet an engagement with the objective of shooting down fighters (or that single one) should become a risk not on the bright side in the turreted fire power's regards.

"Whacha' Tink?"
~Space Time~

 

[John Lionard]

Elite and most of all Frontier prove from the start that they want to reward new player as much as they can, while completely ignoring players that are in this game since Beta.
We are not talking about prices because there are many posts about it and it is already proven how unfair it is to older players.
But the entire game is also build around making new players happy.
Turrets are THE weakest weapons in the game to such level if i remember correctly Fix Pulse laser 1 is as good as Turrets pulse laser 3. Armor is the most important part of the game not shields ( Full Armor Kelbeck without shield is stronger than Conda on Max shields ).

They are nerfing expensive weapons since release day, not only turrets but also torpedos, missiles, plasma accelerator all nerfed to hell.
By the looks of it i'm almost certain that in about 2 years Elite Dangerous will look like this.

Viper = Corvette
Fixed Pluse Lase 1 = Everything that is not fixed
Missiles, Torpedos, Plasma Accelerator = you will be laught at.

The sooner people will notice that this is done only for the marketing point ( to make new players happy and invite more new players ) the sooner people will understand that this won't change.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Ah and which Pros would that be for the Bigger Ships ?

+More Hitpoints
+More Armour
+More Shields
+More Weapons
+Smaller weapons do 33% less damage per size rating against your ship.

Lets make a rough example.

Small ship 33 HP
Medium ship 66 HP
Large Ship 99 HP

Small and Large ship both have a S1 laser that does 9 points of damage. Both ships shoot at each other and HIT.

Result:

Small ship: -9 HP
Large ship: -3 HP

Total damage to small ship: 27%
Total damage to large ship: 3%

If that additional damage reduction apart from the fact that larger ships already have massive armour and HP already SHOULD have cost the larger ship 9% hp loss.

The ONLY counterpoint smaller ships have is that larger TURRETS are worse at tracking smaller targets.

You want to hit a smaller target, get a smaller turret, a larger turret does very little difference in damage (Large 3 DPS / Medium 2 DPS / Small 2 DPS)

Get the right tool for the job, the larger turret is not designed to hit small targets.

 

[shambles1980]

i like the multi cannon turrets. I also like the gimbled burst lasers or beam lasers. and i like fixed frag cannon..
they all vary in effectiveness from ship to ship, but combined they do the job regardless.