Why do we not get autoconverge for fixed weapons?

[Poseidal]

This has bothered me since release. Why do fixed weapons not have any form of convergence?

Auto-convergence would really help in the game, and it isn't unrealistic considering:

1. Fixed weapons already micro-gimbal
2. Our ship computer can already accurately calculate ranges

There's no tracking involved other than the normal targetting, but the ship could easily calculate the target to auto converge fixed weapons that are widely spaced to the distance the targeting computer does. With no target, they would simply snap forward as normal.

If this is implemented, it would breathe new life into the Clipper, help the Type-10, the Federal Corvette would benefit for a lot of mounts, even the Cobra Mk3, and I'm only naming a few.

Not only this, but it gives design space for ships that may have weapons in the nacelles (like the Chieftain possibly).

I think it is a win-win solution to our fixed-weapon woes with many ships, and would go down well with a lot of people. How about it?

 

[Aashenfox]

The problem is that the hardpoint placement is a major balance factor of the ships. FD are well aware that you can only really make good use of missiles or other F&F ordnance from the outer size 1 slots in a cobra, adn that to use fixed weapons in those slots is irritating at best. The Clipper is already very OP even with its bad hardpoints. The courier would become even better, too (that's hard to imagine, lol)...

The FDL that you advertise in your sig, it lacks in some areas (heat management, outright agility), but it more than makes up for it with those lusciously positioned hardpoints.

 

[Muetdhiver]

Niche protection.

It makes some ships better than other for fixed weapons, adding a extra DoF for differentiation.
Also, it avoid making the iCourrier the god of all small ships lol.

What I Wonder is why there are no restricted hardpoints (e.g. spinal mounts that can only get fixed weapons, or turret mounts that can only use those to
further differentiation)

 

[babelfisch]

I agree!

The problem is that the hardpoint placement is a major balance factor of the ships.

There is no balance in Elite. Not after the engineers and introduction of HRP/MRP/SCB/SB nonsense.
Anyway, if you still want a drawback for fixed weapons (even though still the vast majority uses gimballs AFAIK) how about introducing it as a mod that also reduces damage becaue the mounts aren't as sturdy anymore?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Gives small ships a bit of an advantage as well.

And if they had convergence, how far out to set that? What about the effect on long range mods? What if someone prefers convergence at 500m while someone else wants it at 2km? Then you start getting into the topic about how it should be adjustable on a per ship or per hardpoint placement, adding more work for the devs, and eventually you get to the point where its more effort than its worth. Plus then you also get people complaining that fixed shouldn't have convergence or that it gives fixed too much of an advantage, so fixed should now be nerfed because of the convergence.

If you mean make them automatically converge, then that's half way to gimballed as well, so some people will tell you to git gud instead, and again, it then increases the power of fixed, so the argument comes in it should be nerfed as well.

 

[Aashenfox]

I agree!


There is no balance in Elite. Not after the engineers and introduction of HRP/MRP/SCB/SB nonsense.
Anyway, if you still want a drawback for fixed weapons (even though still the vast majority uses gimballs AFAIK) how about introducing it as a mod that also reduces damage becaue the mounts aren't as sturdy anymore?

Whether you think the game is balanced or not does not change the fact that hardpoint placement IS a balancing 'factor'.

 

[babelfisch]

Whether you think the game is balanced or not does not change the fact that hardpoint placement IS a balancing 'factor'.

Yes, but using that argument Engineers and defensive modules are a balancing factor as well and should have never made it into the game.
It's a non argument.

 

[Aashenfox]

Yes, but using that argument Engineers and defensive modules are a balancing factor as well and should have never made it into the game.
It's a non argument.

I don't agree.

 

[babelfisch]

I don't agree.

That's fine, you don't need to

 

[Poseidal]

Niche protection.

It makes some ships better than other for fixed weapons, adding a extra DoF for differentiation.
Also, it avoid making the iCourrier the god of all small ships lol.

I don't think convergence is is a good way of doing this (differentiation of ships, there are much MUCH better things that can be done to diverge ship usage and types), and it just makes it frustrating and it happens even on ships with good placement.

What I Wonder is why there are no restricted hardpoints (e.g. spinal mounts that can only get fixed weapons, or turret mounts that can only use those to
further differentiation)

Restricted hardpoints would actually be a really good idea, and it also allows turrets to be implemented properly as they are more easily balanced if they are restricted to some slots. It also gives more variety in ship roles and types.

However it is a much bigger hurdle to do, as it may involve re-jigging models. Implementing auto convergence seems a smaller hurdle.

 

[Aashenfox]

That's fine, you don't need to

 

[babelfisch]

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/5b/5b1ffd37c9f5f13bf4c2a9ee5e27d13a7be09958eb62ac819b12f648104544e9.jpg

I know, but this isn't about being right or wrong. You have an opinion, I have an opinion. That's fine.

 

[Poseidal]

Gives small ships a bit of an advantage as well.

And if they had convergence, how far out to set that? What about the effect on long range mods? What if someone prefers convergence at 500m while someone else wants it at 2km? Then you start getting into the topic about how it should be adjustable on a per ship or per hardpoint placement, adding more work for the devs, and eventually you get to the point where its more effort than its worth. Plus then you also get people complaining that fixed shouldn't have convergence or that it gives fixed too much of an advantage, so fixed should now be nerfed because of the convergence.

If you mean make them automatically converge, then that's half way to gimballed as well, so some people will tell you to git gud instead, and again, it then increases the power of fixed, so the argument comes in it should be nerfed as well.

I am suggesting auto convergence rather than a fixed one, as fixed weapons have a micro gimbal anyway, and attacking at range allows wider hits that would miss up close to hit anyway. At long range, it would make no difference on ships that can used fixed at all, it just makes it a bit less silly to use at short range, especially against small targets.

What I suggest auto-converge does is formalise it, while also making it less frustrating in general. In terms of gitting gud, it doesn't really change the way it plays as the targetting reticule is still fixed, it is just all the weapons converge to meet that point at the target distance. It doesn't have the lax aiming of gimbals, for example. The only difference is that you no longer have to contend with some weapons being wildly out when aiming at something.

 

[Aashenfox]

I know, but this isn't about being right or wrong. You have an opinion, I have an opinion. That's fine.

Yeh to be honest, I don't mind that you hold that opinion, and I don't think you're wrong, per se, BUT I genuinely believe that statements like yours are why we are about to get engineering made a lot worse, without any attention to what actually needed attention (materials gathering). You seem to think engineering ruined balance, and between an engineered ship and a non engineered ship, it did, however it gave us something far more important, a means of becoming more powerful consummate with the effort we put in (though perhaps it shouldn't require SO much). This is an absolutely critical mechanism in games like elite where progress is a time dependant activity, and is what we're about to lose.

 

[GunnerBill]

It’s all added coding complexity but what about some simple factory presets for convergence on specific hardpoints that could be set at a cost either at an engineer or in outfitting?

 

[Poseidal]

It’s all added coding complexity but what about some simple factory presets for convergence on specific hardpoints that could be set at a cost either at an engineer or in outfitting?

I think that's actually more effort to code and implement than an autoconverge. Fixed weapons already 'snap' at range, this basically does something similar as long as the target is in the crosshairs of the ship.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I am suggesting auto convergence rather than a fixed one, as fixed weapons have a micro gimbal anyway, and attacking at range allows wider hits that would miss up close to hit anyway. At long range, it would make no difference on ships that can used fixed at all, it just makes it a bit less silly to use at short range, especially against small targets.

What I suggest auto-converge does is formalise it, while also making it less frustrating in general. In terms of gitting gud, it doesn't really change the way it plays as the targetting reticule is still fixed, it is just all the weapons converge to meet that point at the target distance. It doesn't have the lax aiming of gimbals, for example. The only difference is that you no longer have to contend with some weapons being wildly out when aiming at something.

That still makes fixed more powerful, in which case, a nerf might be warranted.

 

[Aashenfox]

That still makes fixed more powerful, in which case, a nerf might be warranted.

I see where you're coming from, but definitely not, imo. Fixed need a buff if anything, gimbals are still worth a lot more effective dps due to time on target in the hands of all but the very best. I could even argue that better convergence would go some way toward addressing this, but of course it will make those that are already good, even better.

I'm not in favour of autoconvergence, by the way, I'm happy with the way they are now. Toward balance, I would actually like to get a small heat reduction added to fixed weapons to go with the slight damage buff and slightly lower power draw.

 

[Red Fox Four]

And here I thought "auto-convergence" meant "gimballed weapons"

 

[metatheurgist]

Sure, as long as when gimballed weapons get chaffed they auto fix and the damage goes up by 25% instead of doing that ridiculous Robbie the robot arm wave they do now.