These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Turret-related nonsense that always bothered me.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2011-12-11 16:36:37 UTC
Why is it that dual-gun weapons (dual-425 autocannons for example) use large ammo? I would prefer if a gun is of a smaller caliber, it uses the smaller ammunition. To compensate for the smaller ammo's damage modifier, simply raise the turret's firing rate or damage multiplier to match current specs. This would enhance immersion and create a uniqueness among the lower tier guns.
Dietz0r Saraki
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2011-12-11 16:37:44 UTC
Rawls Canardly wrote:
Why is it that dual-gun weapons (dual-425 autocannons for example) use large ammo? I would prefer if a gun is of a smaller caliber, it uses the smaller ammunition. To compensate for the smaller ammo's damage modifier, simply raise the turret's firing rate or damage multiplier to match current specs. This would enhance immersion and create a uniqueness among the lower tier guns.


Why dont the "dual" and "quads" not just use 2 (4 in quads) charges per shot? of the smaller calliber? THAT would be awesome!
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2011-12-11 16:41:45 UTC
Dietz0r Saraki wrote:
Rawls Canardly wrote:
Why is it that dual-gun weapons (dual-425 autocannons for example) use large ammo? I would prefer if a gun is of a smaller caliber, it uses the smaller ammunition. To compensate for the smaller ammo's damage modifier, simply raise the turret's firing rate or damage multiplier to match current specs. This would enhance immersion and create a uniqueness among the lower tier guns.


Why dont the "dual" and "quads" not just use 2 (4 in quads) charges per shot? of the smaller calliber? THAT would be awesome!

I could get behind that.
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2011-12-11 16:43:12 UTC
Seriously, I know EVE is not RL, but just imagine for a second...
"We built a quad .50 caliber antiaircraft gun. it uses artillery shells."
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#5 - 2011-12-11 17:11:09 UTC
To continue along that line of reasoning, how does the same ammo I use for my 125mm ACs fit in the 280mm arties? Anyone who's fired a gun knows that it just doesn't work that way.

If you start going down that line of reasoning, where does it stop? No, it might not be the most realistic, but it's a heck of a lot easier than remembering which large guns really use medium ammo and which ones don't. What we have right now is a simple and clean-cut system (even with the slightly weird names at times), it works fine as-is.
Rykuss
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2011-12-11 17:17:10 UTC
I've always wondered why these guns function the way they currently do as well. Take the dual 250 rail turret, it's two cruiser turrets yet it fires one large round. I'm guessing it's for simplicity, since it is a large weapon being used on a ship with bonuses for that type. Still seems backwards to me.

You, too, can be a Solid Gold dancer.
Foxbat40
BlackTalon Mining Corp
#7 - 2011-12-11 17:30:22 UTC
Because it is a game and they took the users ease of use into account.
If it is a large turret it uses large ammo. Simple as that.

This game is complicated enough as it is.
Rykuss
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2011-12-11 17:50:34 UTC
One possibility is that CCP could place these turrets in their respective category. Dual cruiser turrets could stay in the medium category and fire their respective charge size, albeit slower.

You, too, can be a Solid Gold dancer.
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2011-12-11 17:52:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawls Canardly
Foxbat40 wrote:
Because it is a game and they took the users ease of use into account.
If it is a large turret it uses large ammo. Simple as that.

This game is complicated enough as it is.

This wouldn't complicate matters that much, and would actually make an interesting niche. Say, double the fire rate of the medium gun, same range, blah blah blah... it'd be like assault launchers, for guns.
edit- as it stands, there's not much the dual guns have to offer, except for being easier to fit.
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2011-12-11 17:57:40 UTC
Rykuss wrote:
One possibility is that CCP could place these turrets in their respective category. Dual cruiser turrets could stay in the medium category and fire their respective charge size, albeit slower.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve1DCnMWVfA does that look slower to you? I'd say double the fire rate of the medium, same range, with BS-grade tracking.
Rykuss
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2011-12-11 18:33:44 UTC
Rawls Canardly wrote:
Rykuss wrote:
One possibility is that CCP could place these turrets in their respective category. Dual cruiser turrets could stay in the medium category and fire their respective charge size, albeit slower.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve1DCnMWVfA does that look slower to you? I'd say double the fire rate of the medium, same range, with BS-grade tracking.


Is that turret using cap? Turrets in EVE do, well most anyway. There are drawbacks to using the weapon in the video, namely slower reload time as opposed to a single barrel version. Sure, you can have a crew of three manning it but that ties up more manpower and all those hands getting in each others way. Then there's the increased potential for mechanical failure. It's also more costly, ammo isn't free. All of that is considered a trade-off for increased defense against an attacker.

EVE has mechanics in place for the sake of balance and there are drawbacks here as well.

You, too, can be a Solid Gold dancer.
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2011-12-11 18:56:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawls Canardly
Rykuss wrote:
Rawls Canardly wrote:
Rykuss wrote:
One possibility is that CCP could place these turrets in their respective category. Dual cruiser turrets could stay in the medium category and fire their respective charge size, albeit slower.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve1DCnMWVfA does that look slower to you? I'd say double the fire rate of the medium, same range, with BS-grade tracking.


Is that turret using cap? Turrets in EVE do, well most anyway. There are drawbacks to using the weapon in the video, namely slower reload time as opposed to a single barrel version. Sure, you can have a crew of three manning it but that ties up more manpower and all those hands getting in each others way. Then there's the increased potential for mechanical failure. It's also more costly, ammo isn't free. All of that is considered a trade-off for increased defense against an attacker.

EVE has mechanics in place for the sake of balance and there are drawbacks here as well.

I don't see the problem here. crew is always easy to come by in eve, according to fiction. Increased cost for ammunition isn't that big a deal. increased reload time isn't really the case, thanks to the gunnery crew. and mechanical failure? Give them fewer HP, so they can't overheat as long.
as for cap usage, I don't see a problem there, either. consider them autocannons.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#13 - 2011-12-11 19:04:05 UTC
well. this is really the least significant problem. Have you ever looked at the tracking formula? Why does a ship which orbits another ship has to track at all? Its broken by design (lol). A better tracking formula would probably even fix blasters and short range ships.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2011-12-11 19:08:26 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
well. this is really the least significant problem. Have you ever looked at the tracking formula? Why does a ship which orbits another ship has to track at all? Its broken by design (lol). A better tracking formula would probably even fix blasters and short range ships.

I agree, that's much more important, but that deserves it's own thread.
Rykuss
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2011-12-11 20:42:13 UTC
Rawls Canardly wrote:
consider them autocannons.


I'm guessing your proposal includes rails and lasers as well?

You, too, can be a Solid Gold dancer.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2011-12-11 21:04:17 UTC
Stop assuming in the world of "Sy-Fy" (<-- lol-comedy word) is real. 150mm Dual gun firing the same round as a 200 and 250...there is one simple answer...Barrel Length. BAM! Done. Nobody says it can't be the length of a barrel or X number of rifling per X MM as every gun fires the same round BUT each gun has a different number tagged to it.

And lets not forget, CCP in their infinite wisdom (lol I made another joke) decided last expansion to change gun turrets for no real reason. It wasn't requested as far as I remember, they went ahead and did it unlike I don't know...the stupid "fix" to add implants to pod KM which they lied that it was difficult to do so and would promote headhunting make it unfun to the players (which it does, awesome "risk" to the chump in a 2 mill destroyer bagging hundreds of millions in implant KM at no risk to himself while he spouts its a harsh universe...except when it does not apply to him...CCP, make EVE so harsh that not even gankers will enjoy it Twisted ). Back on topic, the 800mm autocannon used to be a single barrel and now its a dual barrel graphic which makes you wonder...how does a weapon fire an 800mm shell sharable by other smaller guns and fire it from two different barrels. The player base may never know...
Veronica Kerrigan
Surgically Constructed L Feminist
#17 - 2011-12-11 21:28:57 UTC
I always though of it as the caliber of the shot is equal to the lowest caliber weapon of that size, and they make up the different with a sabot to increase it's hitting power. The kinetic energy goes up, but the warhead itself stays the same.
Midori Tsu
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#18 - 2011-12-11 21:31:27 UTC
It's al explained with ~Magic~
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#19 - 2011-12-11 21:36:28 UTC
Because if you go that route, it'd only make sense to make a different ammo for every single calibre. Which would be painful to manage. Gameplay simplicity trumps realism on occasion.

Overhaul Dscan!
Rawls Canardly
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2011-12-11 21:59:30 UTC
so your argument against it is "NO IF WE DO FOR EVERY GUN IT'S TOO COMPLICATED"
uhh... that's not what this is about. 3-4 weapon types. using existing ammo. What I'm proposing isn't earth-shattering rebalancing.
Stop with the chewbacca defense.