Pilot Archive
Thread: Suggestion: Independent Turrets?
Page 1 of 6
AirDingo
Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:46 pm
#1
I just recently purchased my VT-49 and got a bunch of friends to crew it with me and we went up.The VT-49 is great and the devs did a wonderful job at adapting it for multiple people. Several things are curious though. The VT-49 has almost 5 million mass yet no more hardpoints than a the oppressor... This is an Assault Ship? Should be more turrets or multiple armor plates or shields.But anyway the point of this thread is the possibility of Independent Turrets.
An Independent Turret is one that moves independently of the rest of the ship. Meaning if you pointed the turret at some point the turret would remain pointing in that direction regardless of how the ship twisted and turned beneath it as long as it didn't move past its arc of fire. I believe this would dramtically improve the performance of these types of vessels. Now I say the VT-49 because thats what I fly but this would also work wonders with the YT-1300 and YKL-37Rs.
When flying the VT-49, my crew and I were hard pressed to fend off even a few Tier 4s which gave none of us any problems out of the craft. I couldn't understand why since we were all excellent pilots... That is until I climbed into the turret myself. Having the turret move with the ship makes it extremely difficult to hit attacking ships. The combat effectiveness of the VT-49 even when fully crewed is significantly less than a starfighter with but a single occupant. The NPCs prove this to be untrue as anyone who has attempted to solo a Gunboat knows.
Armos "AirDingo" Arsadi
Kinathran Corporation CO
Wanderhome
AnteriusPataka
Mon Nov 22, 2004 11:48 pm
#2
I can agree. I've been up in a decimator as well. The attempts at evasive maneuvers by the pilot hamper the attempts of the gunners to keep even the most basic of fighters off our tail.
This should be fixed quickly and immediately. This is going to kill multiplayer combat ships from being used often, if at all.
Zade_Taerin
Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:26 am
#4
I was up in a friend's NovaCourier the other day and we didn't have any problems at all... the pilot just needs to fly in a manner to accomodate the gunners. With a large "super-mass" ship you shouldn't expect to be dodging laser bolts. His method of flying was to fly straight and level into the target group head-on, once that target group shot passed and cleared out of range of our turrets he would pull a full 180 and level off into the group as is made it's next pass. We were clearing Tier 4 Ties and Pirates quite easily and never had to conduct internal repairs.
It takes a lot of patience from the pilot to be running straight line paths for extended periods of time... but it works... and it works very well. I actually like the non-independent aspect to the turret... it adds a bit more challenge to the gunnery process...besides just mousing over a target and holding the fire button. Eventually you get used to moving your turret with the ship. Additionaly, non-independent turrets actually means that the pilot of the ship is more then just a bus driver... he's got to move to accomodate the gunners, he's back into the battle and not sitting mindlessly at the controls flying circles or straight lines. It's his ship, let him have a part in the action as well.
Message Edited by Zade_Taerin on 11-23-2004 09:31 AM
NightGun
Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:57 am
#5
I would say increase armor and shields and be sure your pilot knows that the more evasive they try to be the less effective the gunners will be. I think this is how it should be. It would be extremely unrealistic and way to easy if the computer just auto aimed the turrets for you (why bother manning them at all since player skill woudl no longer matter). The AI turrets seem to be highly acurate (This is a problem with me) you wil notice though (at least I have) that the AI turret ships tend to fly a lot of straight lines. MP ships should be more heavily shielded and armored so that straigh line flight would be something you could think of. As a turret gunner if the pilot is very evasive you should expect to have issue with hitting anything you don't shoot the seconds it comes into range because the ship (which the gun is mounted to) is constantly moving.
Zade_Taerin
Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:03 am
#6
The multiple-player ships have the mass to mount any behemoth type weapon you want... and there's still tons or room for the other goodies (shields, armour). Your ships advantage is the ability to mount massive turreted firepower, not it's ability to dodge. The pilot should be thinking less of evasion and more on accomodating the gunner.
PadiOne
Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:06 am
#7
AnteriusPataka wrote:
I can agree. I've been up in a decimator as well. The attempts at evasive maneuvers by the pilot hamper the attempts of the gunners to keep even the most basic of fighters off our tail.
This should be fixed quickly and immediately. This is going to kill multiplayer combat ships from being used often, if at all.
That's not a problem with the ship, that's a problem with the pilot. Our Decimator pilot got a relatively loud lesson over teamspeak about how he was flying a capital ship and not an interceptor. A pilot that doesn't know how to fly the 49 is just going to cause the gunners to throw up in the turrets.
Also, I realize that there are just as many hard points in the oppressor, but the oppressors mass is small enough that you have a net affect of having smaller hard points. By this, I mean that you aren't going to put 3 mark II space bombs or mark 3 seismics in an oppressor. At least not if you plan on putting any guns in.
What I'd like to see from the 49, courier and yt is a dmg modifier applied to the turrets. Laser batteries are tough to hit with, but should really rack up the dmg quick when they hit.
DosWindo
Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:13 am
#8
Absolutely agreed. Your turret guys and your pilots need to give each other feedback. When I was on guns, Iasked our esteemed pilot to "keep it horizontal"; little or no banking, looping, or extreme manuevering. This made it much easier to track and fire. It may slow down the turnaround, but in this case it doesn't matter; you're not gonna jockey for a tail position in these ships; it's just not gonna happen.
But there is one thing. The guns on a ship this size should be devastating. That I'm aware of, the most I've ever seen a blaster do is about 4k max. We need some blasters on these ships that do 10k a pop, in order to make up for the difficulty in drawing a bead. Make them 100k mass to keep them out of fighters...
One thing that would be nice that was in SW:Alliance, are locking turrets. When using a big turret ship, you could lock them both forward, or one forward and one back, and run them from the cockpit. We're not likely to see this, as the point of these ships is to encourage players to work together. And it is far more fun that way.
But yeah, for one big ship to do as much or more damage as the crew all in their own fighters, they're gonna hafta release some serious big ship parts. 10-20k shields, 10-12k guns... all that rot.
1st_Viduus
Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:16 am
#9
I wish i could agree with the original request but I can't.
Evasive maneuvering is a feux-pas in the MP ships; they take a hit to PYR and speed for a reason.
Properly crewed, the pilot needs to adapt his flight style to accomodate the gunners, and maintain communication with the crew to know where and when to turn. As a fighter pilot, I found this to be challenging, but not impossible.
With an Operations chair occupied and an FC carrying a few shield adjusts and other programs, unless you're outgunned very badly, there's no reason any damage should be getting to the armor even. If it is, you should have had some fighter escorts. :}
My Deci has 2433 f/r shields, 1850 armor f/r, and a 10 second T10 droid interface. The FC carries Shield Adjust front to back and back to front (50%).
BTW sheuses 404,500 mass so far, and still not everything on it is T10 lol!
Arryth
Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:23 am
#10
Yeah.. the multiplayer ships were a crushing disapointment.... 
They need more armor, shields and firepower.
DosWindo
Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:02 am
#11
"My Deci has 2433 f/r shields, 1850 armor f/r, and a 10 second T10 droid interface. The FC carries Shield Adjust front to back and back to front (50%)."
See that's just the thing... my Y-wing LP has those same shields, along with 2 blasters that do 2-3k each. And I managed this without having to cut corners oneverything else.
Methinx the MP ships should have far more firepower and defense than what a standard fighter is capable of holding.
I think that MP ships themselves are perfect, and the concept is great. They just need better parts. And that in itself would offset the difficulty of aiming when someone else is flying. As it is, if I've got similar gear on my fighterthat an MP ship has, my odds are pretty good in that scuffle. But you throw a 8-10k blaster out there that can wipe my shields and armor in one hit...
To compare... take those same 5 guys and put em in fighters. If they're even halfway competent they're probably gonna tear me up. The same should be the case in a MP ship.
1st_Viduus
Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:23 am
#12
Agreed, the cert10 parts need some love, for defense, at least.
I need 7 more Cert 10 shields to make a single "Max All" shield.
I have a cert 10 with 24.8 recharge, but a mere 1200 f/r lol...
Arryth
Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:31 am
#13
I think that the multiplayer ships should have the following, to make them worth useing over seperat fighters...
1)Two reactors
2)Two shields (one front, one back... of like 5k front/back shields
3)Four Armor (two fron, two back... possible 5k armopr front/back)
4)Each turret actually being a three weapon "bank".. so between the two turrets..6 blasters. That would give it equivelent firepower to an heavy fighter on each side...which is about right.
5)Two forward fireing blasters controled by pilot.. face it... Missiles are too expensive and two slow to keep the pilot entertained... Give him some blasters.
Add these thingsand its multiplayer heaven. It will encourage space groups alot.
Page 1 of 6