Turret Nerfs are Overdoing it Guys.

[DragoonKnight]

If that's the level of understanding of physics encoded into the Elite Dangerous weapon model, that explains so much. ;-)

Seriously. There's absolutely no doubt that a 9mm shot is more fatal to a mouse than to an elephant, to cite your favorite example.

But that's because the animal has more mass and thicker skin - which maps to more hull mass and more armor already. This affects the relative damage to the target. The absolute kinetic impact is the same.

Introducing an additional damage modifier is just sloppy coding. (I'm a programmer. I can hear the conversation in my head - "Hrm, with those weapons and hull and armor weights, this doesn't make sense. Do we recalculate them all or introduce some random modifier?")

Smaller weapons already inflict less absolute damage, they have shorter range, etc.

As for that battleship versus tank equivalent - I really don't think a battleship would like to be hit by even one tank's main gun. Just, you know, saying.

Going back to the topic of this thread though - none of that justifies the damage penalties that turrets get, and how badly they are positioned on the ships.

The Tank's gun will do damage to a battleship, but it will not be enough. A near miss by a 16 inch Naval Gun, such as the one on the IOWA class, will destroy the tank. A direct hit will result in there being nothing more than a crater and scraps of metal.

The level of firepower is so disproportionate here that it is comparable to a soldier with an M-16 being charged at by a caveman with a spork from a mile away

 

[Brawl]

I've used turreted weapons successfully on my python since they came out. 2x med turreted beams and 3x large turreted pulse or burst. I absolutely suck at combat, so the turrets help tremendously with that aspect. Am I doing as much damage as I could, no. But I enjoy the fact that my targets are still taking damage while I figure out where they just went. Could turrets be stronger yes, but your ALWAYS going to have weapons that are better than others and as of the current build turrets just aren't it.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

1.
An T9 is an Transport.
Its Fighting Capacity is not relevant for Balancing.

For the Vulture this sort of Balancing is very Relevant.

Once again you are completely ignoring the point because it is convenient to your argument. The only person who can seriously believe this argument is you.
First and foremost, the T9's fighting capacity is absolutely relevant to any fighting change. We don't give the T9 crazy good firepower and ignore it just because it's a trader.
Second, if the T9 has better DPS than the vulture and any 2s2m fighter, then what does that say for the actual weight DPS has in a real fight? It's almost like there's more to a fighter than its burst DPS or something.

Why exactly should I choose a Corvette over any other ship in my Fleet (see my sig) for Combat? I am really struggling to come up with an answer for this one.

There is no answer to this.

There is NO reason to choose a corvette over almost any capable fighter. Accept this.
What you and the OP don't get is that changing turrets will not change this. It has more to do with FD stripping away the general validity of big ships for whatever reason. If I had to guess, I would assume it's something to do with the multi-crew update, or something they have planned for huge hard points. This issue started before and during the SCB change, and didn't get popular until a big ship that was also not the best trader rolled around.

 

[Sunleader]

Once again you are completely ignoring the point because it is convenient to your argument. The only person who can seriously believe this argument is you.
First and foremost, the T9's fighting capacity is absolutely relevant to any fighting change. We don't give the T9 crazy good firepower and ignore it just because it's a trader.
Second, if the T9 has better DPS than the vulture and any 2s2m fighter, then what does that say for the actual weight DPS has in a real fight? It's almost like there's more to a fighter than its burst DPS or something.


There is no answer to this.

There is NO reason to choose a corvette over almost any capable fighter. Accept this.
What you and the OP don't get is that changing turrets will not change this. It has more to do with FD stripping away the general validity of big ships for whatever reason. If I had to guess, I would assume it's something to do with the multi-crew update, or something they have planned for huge hard points. This issue started before and during the SCB change, and didn't get popular until a big ship that was also not the best trader rolled around.

Ah so you think because an T9 is an Transport its Weapons must Suck by Default. And its not allowed to have Firepower anyways ?
Nice that we know where your coming from.

Guess only Fighters are allowed Super Firepower...
All other Ships have to Suck by Default. Fighters for the Win or what ???


Why exactly should an T9 not have alot of Firepower with the few Guns it has mate ?
Its an very Big Ship.
So why should its Guns do less Damage than the Guns of an Fighter ?


Also.
Ehm mate.
If Turrets would do the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.
Not even Fixed Weapons. But Gimballed Weapons.

The Current Corvettes would Immediatly be able to Perform their Original Role.
Because they would be able to well. Use Turrets. Thus being Able to Fight Broadside rather than Frontally giving them an Much Larger leeway in Mobility.
Moreover it would allow them to use their Armor because an Fighter cant just do an Run on the Corvette and Breaks its Shields Causing Hull Damage then retreating before the Turrets finally got the Shields of the Fighter down. And Repeat this to kill the Corvette.


Imagine an Imperial Cutter which has only Turrets and these Turrets doing same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.
I can assure you. Anyone who is right in the Mind. Would certainly not Approach this Ship without Heavy Fixed Weaponry and Torpedoes or Something.
Because anyone in his right Mind would make sure to not Stay within the Firing Range of this Ship for longer Times.

Compared to now where Turrets are not even causing enough Damage to keep an Enemy on Distance. This would be an So Incredible Huge Improvement that it would change the entire Gameplay of Corvettes Mate.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Ah so you think because an T9 is an Transport its Weapons must Suck by Default. And its not allowed to have Firepower anyways ?
Nice that we know where your coming from.

Guess only Fighters are allowed Super Firepower...
All other Ships have to Suck by Default. Fighters for the Win or what ???


Why exactly should an T9 not have alot of Firepower with the few Guns it has mate ?
Its an very Big Ship.
So why should its Guns do less Damage than the Guns of an Fighter ?

M M8
This isn't what I've said at all. Apply some reading comprehension to my post before responding. This isn't even close to what my post says. Are you even trying?

Also.
Ehm mate.
If Turrets would do the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.

You are taking a narrow minded an one dimensional approach to your assessment - there's more to the issue of big ships than damage (hint, this is what my previous post was saying, how you got anything else is beyond me).

Chaff protects against turrets and no amount of extra damage will change that. It's so simple, I have no idea why this simple fact escapes you. Buffing turrets are not going to fix the problem.

Once more, just in case, with random capital letters.
Buffing Turrets Is Not Going To Fix The Problem.
M8.

 

[Sunleader]

M M8
This isn't what I've said at all. Apply some reading comprehension to my post before responding. This isn't even close to what my post says. Are you even trying?


You are taking a narrow minded an one dimensional approach to your assessment - there's more to the issue of big ships than damage (hint, this is what my previous post was saying, how you got anything else is beyond me).

Chaff protects against turrets and no amount of extra damage will change that. It's so simple, I have no idea why this simple fact escapes you. Buffing turrets are not going to fix the problem.

Once more, just in case, with random capital letters.
Buffing Turrets Is Not Going To Fix The Problem.
M8.

1.
Mate.
You said if an T9 would get Firepower this would be Troublesome.
And no Mate its not.
An T9 is an Heavy High End Transport.
It has Less Weapons and less other Stats (except Transport Capacity) than other Ships of that Ranking.

So against another Ship within its Ranking it will still lose.
However. It will be able to Defend itself against Eagles and Cobras by at least keeping them at Distance for Longer Time and not allow em to constantly sit on his Rear at 500m Doing Fat Damage to him.
Something it for which it has no Chance at all Currently.


2.
There your Hypocrisity comes again...

So you say. That Corvettes are currently Viable using Gimballed Weapons despite only being able to Hit Enemies during an Timed Window.
But you say Turrets would be useless thanks to Chaff ??

So which is it?

Gimballed Weapons are also affected by Chaff.
And They are having less Firing Time than Gimballed.

If Turrets would be useless thanks to Chaffs.
Then how can you possibly claim that an Corvette with Gimballed Weapons is currently an Viable Ship for Combat ??????


Chaffs only offer Protection for Limited Time.
They can Bridge Windows against Gimballed Weapons.
And they can allow for Approaches on Turreted Ships of Course.

But against an Corvette with its Turrets doing the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons. You would basicly need to Constantly throw Chaffs to stay within its Range.
Not only will that not work by the Mechanics. But you will also Run out of Chaffs before the Corvette is Down.



3.
Mate.
IF There is even the slightest bit of Truth in your Earlier Statements. That an Corvette can currently be Played with Gimballed Weapons.
Than Turrets doing the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.
Will make an Corvette much much Stronger.

So yes. It will Fix an Large Part of the Problem.
If Turrets would do the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.

I would not attempt to Approach an Anti Air Specialized Anaconda without at least 3 Cobras.
And even then. I would make sure to have alot of Chaffs and Rotate the Attacks on the Anaconda having the Attacked Cobra take Distance so none of the Cobras is constantly taking Fire.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

1.
Mate.
You said if an T9 would get Firepower this would be Troublesome.
And no Mate its not.
An T9 is an Heavy High End Transport.
It has Less Weapons and less other Stats (except Transport Capacity) than other Ships of that Ranking.

So against another Ship within its Ranking it will still lose.
However. It will be able to Defend itself against Eagles and Cobras by at least keeping them at Distance for Longer Time and not allow em to constantly sit on his Rear at 500m Doing Fat Damage to him.
Something it for which it has no Chance at all Currently.

There's a distinct lack of reading comprehension in your reply.
I've not said any of this. You're making this up and arguing against it. You've been doing this against everyone who's disagreed with you: Make up their arguments based on your broken interpretation, then pretend that your arguments are valid in response to them.

You said that a vulture is weak in terms of sustained fire power (it's not) compared to 2s2m, as a supporting argument for calling the vulture a weak ship due to its lack of burst (it's not). I rose the counter point that a T9 beats them both in both regards. The T9 is a terrible fighter, so it's clear that more than burst/sustained firepower is needed to be a capable ship.

You tried to leverage the argument that T9 is a transport and therefore you can ignore it when it comes to weapons balance. This is absurd. You can't ignore ship balance just because it's not primarily a fighter.

2.
There your Hypocrisity comes again...

So you say. That Corvettes are currently Viable using Gimballed Weapons despite only being able to Hit Enemies during an Timed Window.
But you say Turrets would be useless thanks to Chaff ??

So which is it?

Gimballed Weapons are also affected by Chaff.
And They are having less Firing Time than Gimballed.

If Turrets would be useless thanks to Chaffs.
Then how can you possibly claim that an Corvette with Gimballed Weapons is currently an Viable Ship for Combat ??????


Chaffs only offer Protection for Limited Time.
They can Bridge Windows against Gimballed Weapons.
And they can allow for Approaches on Turreted Ships of Course.

But against an Corvette with its Turrets doing the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons. You would basicly need to Constantly throw Chaffs to stay within its Range.
Not only will that not work by the Mechanics. But you will also Run out of Chaffs before the Corvette is Down.

There's a clear lack of reading comprehension in the content of your posts. I don't think I've mentioned gimbals at all in the last four pages. I certainly haven't said that a corvette is viable with them. But please, continue to make up arguments. We will all see this, and temper the weight of any future points you may make up against your spectacular track record.
Also, many mid range ships get more than seven minutes worth of chaff. That's a lot of time for turrets to not be firing.

3.
Mate.
IF There is even the slightest bit of Truth in your Earlier Statements. That an Corvette can currently be Played with Gimballed Weapons.
Than Turrets doing the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.
Will make an Corvette much much Stronger.

So yes. It will Fix an Large Part of the Problem.
If Turrets would do the same Damage as Gimballed Weapons.

I would not attempt to Approach an Anti Air Specialized Anaconda without at least 3 Cobras.
And even then. I would make sure to have alot of Chaffs and Rotate the Attacks on the Anaconda having the Attacked Cobra take Distance so none of the Cobras is constantly taking Fire.

No, it won't fix the problem. Big ships will still be prohibitively expensive, taken down by a frag FDL in seconds, slow to get around, etc. The cost effectiveness of larger ships will never match that of medium or slightly larger ships thanks to the game mechanics in place.

You want large flak turrets? Perfectly reasonable request. This would be all kinds of cool.
You want to change the game dynamic to bring the biggest ships into the light? You're gonna need to consider more than just turret damage to make this happen, and this is why your thread is absurd.

 

[Sunleader]

There's a distinct lack of reading comprehension in your reply.
I've not said any of this. You're making this up and arguing against it. You've been doing this against everyone who's disagreed with you: Make up their arguments based on your broken interpretation, then pretend that your arguments are valid in response to them.

You said that a vulture is weak in terms of sustained fire power (it's not) compared to 2s2m, as a supporting argument for calling the vulture a weak ship due to its lack of burst (it's not). I rose the counter point that a T9 beats them both in both regards. The T9 is a terrible fighter, so it's clear that more than burst/sustained firepower is needed to be a capable ship.

You tried to leverage the argument that T9 is a transport and therefore you can ignore it when it comes to weapons balance. This is absurd. You can't ignore ship balance just because it's not primarily a fighter.



There's a clear lack of reading comprehension in the content of your posts. I don't think I've mentioned gimbals at all in the last four pages. I certainly haven't said that a corvette is viable with them. But please, continue to make up arguments. We will all see this, and temper the weight of any future points you may make up against your spectacular track record.
Also, many mid range ships get more than seven minutes worth of chaff. That's a lot of time for turrets to not be firing.




No, it won't fix the problem. Big ships will still be prohibitively expensive, taken down by a frag FDL in seconds, slow to get around, etc. The cost effectiveness of larger ships will never match that of medium or slightly larger ships thanks to the game mechanics in place.

You want large flak turrets? Perfectly reasonable request. This would be all kinds of cool.
You want to change the game dynamic to bring the biggest ships into the light? You're gonna need to consider more than just turret damage to make this happen, and this is why your thread is absurd.

1.
Mate.
No Offense.
But are you attempting to Weasel your Way out of this by using Lies ???

Once again you are completely ignoring the point because it is convenient to your argument. The only person who can seriously believe this argument is you.
First and foremost, the T9's fighting capacity is absolutely relevant to any fighting change. We don't give the T9 crazy good firepower and ignore it just because it's a trader.
Second, if the T9 has better DPS than the vulture and any 2s2m fighter, then what does that say for the actual weight DPS has in a real fight? It's almost like there's more to a fighter than its burst DPS or something.


There is no answer to this.

This is your Post.
Your Saying its bad if it Gets Firepower.


And no Mate.
Its just that you are constantly Contradicting yourself.

Your Swinging this way then this way however it just fits your Idea somehow.
What I am doing is reminding you on your earlier Statements.


And Mate.
Lets take the Pulse Lasers for Example.

2x Large Pulse Lasers.
Are doing 43 Damage per Second.

2x Medium Pulse Lasers + 2x Small Pulse Lasers
Are doing 46 Damage per Second.

Moreover thanks to the 4 Hardpoints rather than just 2 Hardpoints. You have an higher Flexibility in your Weapons.
This is especially Bad because it makes the use of Advanced Ordnance Impossible as it would cut your Damage in Half on the actual Sustained Firepower.


And yes. An T9 is an Terrible Fighter.
Even with Powerful Turrets it wont Win Fights.

Thats why you can Ignore it.
Transports are regardless of their Weapon Damage not Dangerous.


2.
Sigh....
Mate no Offense.
But in this Case feel Free to Continue lying and dreaming.

I am not Arguing with someone who only Taunts and Trolls.
I dont have time for this.....



3.
Mate.
If you made an Ship take out 100 Cobras because its Worth that Much.
This Game would not be Played Anymore.

Cost Efficiency is not Measured 1 to 1

If Turrets did same Damage as Gimballed Weapons. An Single Anaconda would be able to Stand up against 2-3 Cobras at Once.
Thats by far not enough to even Cover half of the Value Difference.
But it would Suffice for the Corvette to be Worth something because Taking it Down with an Single Cobra would be nearly Impossible thus Warranting the Higher Price.




See Mate.
I would immediatly Agree that it would be Great to Introduce New Weapons Including Improved Flak Turrets.
But this would not lead anywhere because they would just Nerf these down as well. So thats not Helping anything.

I would also Immediatly Support to Give Corvettes the Shields they Deserve.
An Class 5 Cargo Rack has Twice the Cargo Space of an Class 4 Cargo Rack.
So an Class 5 Shield should have Twice the Shield Power of an Class 4 Shield.
Which means an Imperial Clipper using his Class 7 Slot for an Shield. Would have quite the Insane Shield Power Compared to an Viper


There is alot of Possible Options.
But the Fastest and Easiest is the Turrets.
Because the Turrets would Immediatly Cut off one of the Worst Disadvantages of the Corvette and allow it to Keep Enemies under Fire Constantly without allowing them to Simply make it an Shootout where the Fighter will Win out thanks to doing Twice the Damage as the Corvette.

 

[DragoonKnight]

One possible solution I can see for turrets would be to transition large ships to a more traditional naval model for turrets. Just one possibility

- Limit the use of turrets to certain ships.
- Turrets changed to have a 180 degree firing arc
- Turret orientation / center position to be set at time of outfitting.
- Damage buffed to fixed weapon levels
- Turret energy efficiency improved to fixed weapon levels

Now you can have ships that are setup to deliver broadsides, have rear coverage, and powerful main guns in the front for taking down the big targets
Now all 7 or 8 turrets on a Conda / Corvette will not fire at once, but the 2 or 3 that do fire will do more damage than before.
Now the large combat ships need to be approached correctly by fighters so the fighters do not eat a face full of beam lasers from the Class 3 broadside turrets. Instead they can approach from the rear and only have to deal with one or two smaller turrets. Or approach from the front and try to dodge the plasma accelerator shots.
Now the T9 can equip some rear facing turrets to discourage pirates from parking themselves on its six all day long.

Yes, a ship can have 7 or 8 turrets all facing to one side and doing absurd amounts of damage in that one direction but doing so will leave him completely open to a Viper strafing him on his unprotected side and wrecking his power plant.

 

[Sunleader]

One possible solution I can see for turrets would be to transition large ships to a more traditional naval model for turrets. Just one possibility

- Limit the use of turrets to certain ships.
- Turrets changed to have a 180 degree firing arc
- Turret orientation / center position to be set at time of outfitting.
- Damage buffed to fixed weapon levels
- Turret energy efficiency improved to fixed weapon levels

Now you can have ships that are setup to deliver broadsides, have rear coverage, and powerful main guns in the front for taking down the big targets
Now all 7 or 8 turrets on a Conda / Corvette will not fire at once, but the 2 or 3 that do fire will do more damage than before.
Now the large combat ships need to be approached correctly by fighters so the fighters do not eat a face full of beam lasers from the Class 3 broadside turrets. Instead they can approach from the rear and only have to deal with one or two smaller turrets. Or approach from the front and try to dodge the plasma accelerator shots.
Now the T9 can equip some rear facing turrets to discourage pirates from parking themselves on its six all day long.

Yes, a ship can have 7 or 8 turrets all facing to one side and doing absurd amounts of damage in that one direction but doing so will leave him completely open to a Viper strafing him on his unprotected side and wrecking his power plant.

Like the Idea.
And yeah something like that would be way more in the Direction of what I would like as well.
And yes thats also one way to Solve Things.


I for my Part hope anyways that we might see Destroyers and Cruisers at some Point.


One thing to Nitpick tough
Most Ships got 250 Degree Arc for their Turrets

 

[Fendalton]

I too like to equip turrets and put full pips to shields and AFK making money.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

1.
Mate.
No Offense.
But are you attempting to Weasel your Way out of this by using Lies ???

Once again you are completely ignoring the point because it is convenient to your argument. The only person who can seriously believe this argument is you.
First and foremost, the T9's fighting capacity is absolutely relevant to any fighting change. We don't give the T9 crazy good firepower and ignore it just because it's a trader.
Second, if the T9 has better DPS than the vulture and any 2s2m fighter, then what does that say for the actual weight DPS has in a real fight? It's almost like there's more to a fighter than its burst DPS or something.


There is no answer to this.

This is your Post.
Your Saying its bad if it Gets Firepower.

There's a distinct lack of reading comprehension in the content of your post. Please underline the part where I say it's bad if the T9 gets firepower.
Because now, I've no degree in the English language, but I'm pretty sure it says "we don't give the T9 crazy good firepower and ignore it because it's a trader".
However, if it says something other than that, please, show us all. Please, I implore you, show us all. Take as long as you need. You get two points if you don't deflect somehow upon realizing how absurd the content of your posts are.
M8.

Damage per Second.

T9: 3x medium pulse lasers + 2x small pulse lasers
Total 61.57 damage per second. According to your line of logic, the T9 is better than them both right?

Believe it or not, there's more to a fight than damage per second. Believe it or not, there's more to a fight than size of hard points. Believe it or not, there's more to a fight than initial burst. Believe it or not, there's more to a fight than pulse lasers. Believe it or not, your attempt to reduce an assessment of these ships to nothing but their hard point sizes is absurd. You even admit this. The T9 clearly has better hard points than the other ships, yet it's a terrible fighter. So why is it taking you an entire page worth of posts to acknowledge how wrong the content of your posts are?

And yes. An T9 is an Terrible Fighter.
Even with Powerful Turrets it wont Win Fights.

Thats why you can Ignore it.
Transports are regardless of their Weapon Damage not Dangerous.

The T9 is indeed a terrible fighter.
That doesn't make it okay to ignore making sure its fighting capacity is balanced, as you implied here:

An T9 is an Transport.
Its Fighting Capacity is not relevant for Balancing.

I am not at all arguing that the T9 should be buffed or nerfed. I'm calling out another one of your broken arguments, where you've basically said it doesn't matter how your proposed changes affect another part of the game. You decided to think that I am arguing against changing the T9, because that would be convenient for you to argue against. This is an illustration of the absurdity of your post.

If Turrets did same Damage as Gimballed Weapons. An Single Anaconda would be able to Stand up against 2-3 Cobras at Once.

And it doesn't appear that FD wants this to be the case, and it has already been explained why. Are you even reading?

See Mate.
I would immediatly Agree that it would be Great to Introduce New Weapons Including Improved Flak Turrets.
But this would not lead anywhere because they would just Nerf these down as well. So thats not Helping anything.

Probably, because you know, they don't want big ships to be stopping little ships. See above paragraph, sentence two.

I would also Immediatly Support to Give Corvettes the Shields they Deserve.
An Class 5 Cargo Rack has Twice the Cargo Space of an Class 4 Cargo Rack.
So an Class 5 Shield should have Twice the Shield Power of an Class 4 Shield.
Which means an Imperial Clipper using his Class 7 Slot for an Shield. Would have quite the Insane Shield Power Compared to an Viper

If you're implying that there's a more straightforward cost/size to capability ratio, I don't disagree that this would probably have been a better structure (like X3/EVE). However, for whatever reason FD went with a structure that emphasizes the superiority of the medium fighter. As a result, there's a distinct lack of content for the largest and smallest ships. Why do this? Beats me, seems absurd. But not nearly as absurd as trying to rebalance the combat dynamic because of a lack of mechanics, which are very likely on the way. That's like me remodeling my house because the blue paint I ordered off amazon isn't gonna ship for two weeks. That's how absurd calling for a turret buff is.

 

[Sunleader]

snip

Mate no Offense.
But as I said in my last Post.

If you insist on only Trolling and Denying Reality.
I dont have Time to put up with you.