Turrets

This site is best viewed in a modern browser with JavaScript enabled.

Glarrg

Why add a pelothera of new turrets that all have different stats and values? Its confusing for players. Youre creating a problem that doesnt need a fix, your new dropship doesnt need loads of turrets just because that what its like in lore.

fire-hound

Glarrg ,
are You expressing Your opinion as an player, as an mapper or an developer?

I ask because I didn't start my work of my own, see?

I am agreed to finish this for an mapper - he asked me to. And he is an active contributing mapper.

And I had private consulting with several other community members spanning players, mappers and devs in regarding the details that concern the 3d art that i make.

The one thing I didn't want to discuss private are the turrets

And not admitting a problem exists, desn't necessarily mean there is none?

Bill

Yes you have exactly what suits the balance and not the other way round. Call it pool toys or whatever you want, but that's what you have to do. Otherwise your thing simply will not be used, simple as that really.

Just have it have been attacked and the other turrets been destroyed if you need an explanation for it.

Also roll back that persecution complex goy.

fire-hound

Bill, at the 1st mention of depleting the turrets of firepower - i was reluctant as well.
Despite some play tests with the Aurora Gunship shoved an average fire support Dropship will obliterate an Atlas on a single salvo.
And where the drop ship weapons to stay at the endorsed weapons level, this Vanir one, being an Sub-capital weapons wielder, would single-handedly obliterate even Dropships, as it's build - intention was to threaten even Warships?

TL;DR: "hope ends here" on any map.
Would You even bother to just consider the ships canon arsenal?

Not only did I decide to give up on it's sub-capital part of it (The Stingray and Piranha missiles will be off-lined), and am about to "excuse" the 5 twin HAG40 turrets for the above reason...

You ("et tu filli?") ask me to turn the gem of the CGB fleet (equiv of WW2 Fletcher class destroyer) into an hot-dog-kiosk?

Why not just model an Papa Smurfs mushroom house instead?

And we all pretend we play Mario Bros?

But to be any remnant of CGB it has to have it's array of "LPL" (will be actually LBL "pretending to be LPL") and at least some of the twin ATM12 turrets?

Having in mind all above, note the turrets in question here are the new- non official ones, I can't see a way but to have them an fraction of their inherent firepower?

So an triple "LPL" turret could have 1/6th of it's 3xLPL firepower = 1/2 LBL.
Likewise the twin ATM12 would yield about ATM4 of destruction per turret.

This is still quite a firepower to bear, but could be an start for an actual play test?

Note: Current Calliope turrets don't use their missiles at all against any targets.

Bill

The fluff isn't important, how it plays is. There's no point worrying about that level of armament until such a time wherein it'd be justified to have in the game. Which may very well be never.

Use the turrets that exist, as they are currently and it'll very likely be used in community maps to great effect. Overcomplicating the situation by insisting that there needs to be custom turret classes and the like means it'll sit on the shelf gathering dust.

In other words, stop worrying about things that aren't currently relevant. If there comes a time where the turret system as a whole is reviewed then perhaps we can have an increased variety of them. But at the moment you're wasting your effort arguing for something that doesn't exist. And I for one would like to see your hard work go to use rather than get put aside simply because you can't/work work within the confines that have been established.

« Previous Page