Feedback on the proposed Gatling turret design
I'm just going to be brutally honest, the game and players deserve better than this. This turret design is just a rehash of the SE1 Gatling turret, a turret you originally designed in early Alpha for SE1. This turret design is literally 12 years old. And it is a very awkward design, being excessively tall and taking up and inordinate amount of space due to that built-in tower base, which also caused it to not match the aesthetics of the Assault Cannon and Artillery, both of which are mounted flush in SE1. I am asking you, please, reconsider this design. Please give us something flush more in line with the more futuristic aesthetics of SE2 we've already seen, not just a rehash of a 2014 design which players already consider awkward and outdated.
I like this feedback
With unified grid you should be able to build blocks around and right up to the gatling base, not letting that be possible would be a no no. The model needs adjusting to make the bottom of the gatling base air tight.
With unified grid you should be able to build blocks around and right up to the gatling base, not letting that be possible would be a no no. The model needs adjusting to make the bottom of the gatling base air tight.
The comment regarding the large height of the "gatlings" is relevant. The ammunition magazine should be recessed into the surface of the ship so that only the firing unit with the weapon and targeting system elements protrude above the surface.
However, the concept of the firing unit – a weapon mounted in a fork mount with a range of motion of 100-110° in the vertical plane on a platform that can rotate 360° in the horizontal plane – is correct. The ammunition storage is the weapon's magazine and is connected directly to the firing unit, forming an integral part of the weapon system.
Most objections relate to the fact that the weapon system protrudes high above the surface of the ship. This is due to the cube-shaped "collision box" of the weapon system, which prevents the lower part of the weapon system from being covered or armored. It is possible that this is a "system problem" that cannot be solved in any other way (it can be solved; there are plugins for SE1 that introduce "low-profile" weapons that can be embedded into the surface of the ship).
Therefore, it would be advisable to consider a two-part solution for the weapon system. A separate firing unit and a separate ammunition magazine, which have a prescribed method of connection.
The comment regarding the large height of the "gatlings" is relevant. The ammunition magazine should be recessed into the surface of the ship so that only the firing unit with the weapon and targeting system elements protrude above the surface.
However, the concept of the firing unit – a weapon mounted in a fork mount with a range of motion of 100-110° in the vertical plane on a platform that can rotate 360° in the horizontal plane – is correct. The ammunition storage is the weapon's magazine and is connected directly to the firing unit, forming an integral part of the weapon system.
Most objections relate to the fact that the weapon system protrudes high above the surface of the ship. This is due to the cube-shaped "collision box" of the weapon system, which prevents the lower part of the weapon system from being covered or armored. It is possible that this is a "system problem" that cannot be solved in any other way (it can be solved; there are plugins for SE1 that introduce "low-profile" weapons that can be embedded into the surface of the ship).
Therefore, it would be advisable to consider a two-part solution for the weapon system. A separate firing unit and a separate ammunition magazine, which have a prescribed method of connection.
Hi fellows! Just 2 cents:
- The base module should be a cube, so it can be integrated into the grid and be airtight.
- as for the gatling design, I second that it would be nice to do a new design, but then again, a gatling is always a gatling so there's not much you can do about it.
Cheers!
Hi fellows! Just 2 cents:
- The base module should be a cube, so it can be integrated into the grid and be airtight.
- as for the gatling design, I second that it would be nice to do a new design, but then again, a gatling is always a gatling so there's not much you can do about it.
Cheers!
im confused, you want a base, that is a cube and builds into the ship, or otherwise you want no base? the reason it has a base is because its a turret, it shoots up and down, and turns 360? it's range for shooting up and down would be reduced if it were shorter.
are you saying the hitbox is too much and gets in the way of building and so you want the turret split into two parts? and then would this apply to other turrets as well?
im confused, you want a base, that is a cube and builds into the ship, or otherwise you want no base? the reason it has a base is because its a turret, it shoots up and down, and turns 360? it's range for shooting up and down would be reduced if it were shorter.
are you saying the hitbox is too much and gets in the way of building and so you want the turret split into two parts? and then would this apply to other turrets as well?
I agree that they need more compact turret models, but more because smaller ships will need turrets smaller than 7.5m. If the unified grid allows the base of this gat to be sunk in to a larger ship so only the moving bits are exposed (as it should) then it solves the issue.
I agree that they need more compact turret models, but more because smaller ships will need turrets smaller than 7.5m. If the unified grid allows the base of this gat to be sunk in to a larger ship so only the moving bits are exposed (as it should) then it solves the issue.
Replies have been locked on this page!