Sorry, this thread is a load of crap. You said the forward gun rocked in a fight against 2 BS yesterday. That's what it's supposed to do, nothing else. Ergo, you proved yourself wrong. Oh, and try reversing and strafing.
It's the siege gun of the siege cruiser, yet its range is SLIGHTLY SHORTER than that of the light mortar. Ok, not enough to really matter, when when you consider that the mortar ALSO allows much easier aiming, the mortar suddenly becomes a tad moreuseful in general. So you get a ship with a big gun, the entire SHIP has to be pointed to use it, but other ships of the same class can use a weapon nearly as strong, but able to be aimed a LOT more easily and in a long range battle, a regular cruiser could get off more mortar shots due to ease of aim.
A siege cruiser should be just that, cruiser designed for siege attacks, but as it is, its range is too limited to give it propper use of what SHOULD be its main advantage.
' Wrote:Sorry, this thread is a load of crap. You said the forward gun rocked in a fight against 2 BS yesterday. That's what it's supposed to do, nothing else. Ergo, you proved yourself wrong. Oh, and try reversing and strafing.
Yes, it IS useful against battleships in a large fleet engagement. But that is about all it currently is VERY useful for.
Past that YOU are a load of crap, as you obviously have never seen me fly, and are just joining the 'i dont like this idea so I'll flame the poter' dogpile.
Also, once again, HOW COME MULTIPLE CRUISER DRIVERS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS.
Answer that. without resorting to saying 'they all suck'.
Wait a minute... a turret-sized light mortar has a very slow refire rate, a greater energy usage, and less efficiency, while the forward gun has a faster refire rate, very energy-efficient, and has a LESS chance of missing?...
AWKWARD...
Personally, many people think of spinal-mounted weapons as the most cumbersome weapons in all of man's history...
The advantages of spinal-mounts are that moving mechanisms are quite space-hungry, and with the added space to use because of no need to be more flexible in hitting targets (the weapon moves with the ship), the designers focus more on the ability of the weapon to do damage when aimed properly, which may let them have slower refire rates, but greater damage factors... Perfect for Cap Vs. Cap battles...
As for turret-based weapons, the designers would let the weapons be more flexible, normally as backups against small fighters, but not relying mostly on them due to fighters being there to protect them...
Logically: Mortars that would be used against caps would have a greater refire rate, whilst the Spinal-mounted Liberty Cruiser gun would be a gamble against a giant target: either hit and win, or miss and lose...
I won't complain if the cruiser would miss, if I would be guaranteed that if it DID hit, the cannon would DEVASTATE the enemy cap, maybe even kill the Battleship in one shot, even if it may have a 0.1 refire rate...
Summary: I think their specs should me interchanged... It's not logically based on facts... If it works on battle, then I salute it, but I suggest the proper way is that the cannon would be a slow, but Armageddon-like weapon-of-mass-destruction...
Hey... I'm just sayin...
(edit): The damage is A-okay... just the others...
(edit 2): a little off-topic, but I would really like to know of a ship that is quite strong on its sides (like the 16th century ships that exchanged broadsides with each other)... Might look cool to have a ship like that
I agree, the way it currently is simply doesnt make sense.
You have same range, but more chance to hit, with the mortar because its a turet and can be aimed, were the main gun can simply be pointed.
VERY useful against big ships, enemies that dont dodge. Ive took out a LOT of gunboats with it because they dont dodge. At all. I've even took out a single bomber with it, in a one in a million lucky shot on a bomber that wasnt dodging at all as I was in reverse thrust engine kill. However, the way it is simply makes the ship too weak aganst another cruiser because while the other cruiser has more guns (regular turrets) PLUS heavy turret mounted weaponry that can track a target (mortars etc).
At the very least, the cockpit of the cruiser needs a big crosshair in the center of the screen.
As for your uber damage, slow as hell approach, the problem is that if the target has a sliver of sheild power left, no hull damage will be done. Unless on impact it does damage for 2-3 second (IE: it hits, and the hit continues to deliver PAST the sheilds). That would also be acceptable, as it would make it uniquely lethal (both in balance and RP sense) while at the same time making it no more limited than it allready is.
Or, for minimal changes, since it is an energy based weapon, allow it a several degree rotation off of center, to make aiming a LITTLE more feasable (read: You still have to point, but dont have to point perfectly, you can afford to be slightly off especily at range)
look. stop whineing about everything.
part of why the gun is like it is now, is so that it is a unique weapon. it does not need to be amde into a more powerful version of the morter.
' Wrote:<span style="font-family:Century Gothic">Violence is Golden</span>
Actually... I have seen you fight. And someone using a name that can be pronounced as 'leet', no matter what historical evidence backs it up, always evokes the same response; 'Meh.'
And I can aim fine with it, so can any other average cruiser pilot.
You just said you can hit Gunboats, why moan then?
' Wrote:Actually... I have seen you fight. And someone using a name that can be pronounced as 'leet', no matter what historical evidence backs it up, always evokes the same response; 'Meh.'
And I can aim fine with it, so can any other average cruiser pilot.
You just said you can hit Gunboats, why moan then?
And now; thread ignored.
Its Lay-Tay Gulf, Not bloody '1337' gulf.
And why cant people actualy contribute, rather than flame the poster ?
Signature violates 1.7, please resize:
1.7 - Pictures that exceed 700px width or signatures that exceed 700*250px*3 MB are not allowed on the forum.
Mephistoles
' Wrote:And past that, your arguement is discounted because you had to come with a 'you suck' comment...
Hey, I didn't say that.
' Wrote:to start your post, showing your not serious about discussing anything.
Reread my post. I actually gave you number of reasons why the forward's gun range shouldn't be any longer....the opposite in fact.
Just get over it. This cruiser is already uber. It combines the agility, size/dodge advantages of a gunboat with the firepower and range of a bigger vessel.
If that still isn't good engough for you, I suggest you work a bit harder and get a Battlecruiser or something.
' Wrote:Answer that. without resorting to saying 'they all suck'.
Perhaps they are inexperienced and too ignorant to listen to the people who know what they're talking about.
A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Factions Involved In![[Image: Golden%20Oaks%20Tours_zpspoqc1yoj.png]](http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac347/Leonardo619Tigre/Golden%20Oaks%20Tours_zpspoqc1yoj.png)
![[Image: avatar_30918.png?dateline=1449208332]](http://discoverygc.com/forums/uploads/avatars/avatar_30918.png?dateline=1449208332){kind=avatar}
![[Image: mgasxy7.png]](http://i.imgur.com/mgasxy7.png)
![[Image: bM9dE4l.png]](https://i.imgur.com/bM9dE4l.png)
