KalOfTheRathi
Nec Tributis
1
   |
Posted - 2015.05.23 00:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Small turrets have always been poorly implemented in Dust514 (made dramatically worse with the release of Uprising 1.0, and not improved during the GREAT TANK GANK). I have published some previous analysis on what is wrong but I suspect that there will be no fix. Previously I suspected that there was nobody capable of figuring it out and now the personnel are at best, over burdened with a to do list that is gigantic.
I cannot help with the ADV/PRO of turret upgrades as both my tankers are lvl 5 before the patch. However, if that is indeed true I suspect you made a good catch.
To recap my previous analysis: there are two issues with small turrets. First there is a physics issue regarding the turret itself. Instead of being a small offset from the main vehicle turrets take on either A: the entire momentum of their vehicle or B: too significant a portion. Evidence by viewing gunners in B-17s, small turret movement in various existing modern day battle tanks. When the turret is not facing the direction of the main vehicle (like being on the top gunner scanning for Reds) there is a significant drag evident. Yet the turret is incredibly small. Indeed, it is merely the weapon itself as it appears to be man remotely (in some unexplained science fiction fashion). The front turrets also display that behavior (slow turning) that is inconsistent with the turret itself. The reason is the moment of inertia is wrong. Indeed, in a video game I would believe that it shouldn't be included. Although it might be interesting in a simulation - Dust514 is as far from a simulation that I can conceive of.
Second issue is the trajectory of the rounds that leave the barrel of any small turret. The small missile is the best example as it makes it very clear the code is distinctly incorrect (tragically so). There are three vectors involved in just exiting the barrel. First is the main vehicle itself, second is the vector of the small turret and the third item is only valid if it is the top turret on a tank, thus it would be the vector of the main turret.
Fire a round from a moving tank with a missile turret, it will go in a random direction. The first one will normally be quite dramatic. If you weren't counting on hitting anything with it then the results are also quite funny. Repeated firing does seem to be less incorrect but it is never correct if there is any movement. To make any shoot with a turret the vehicle needs to be moving in a straight line with the barrel of the small turret, or completely stopped. Successful hits outside of those conditions might be best attributed to luck or the aim assist.
A simple test would be possible if the code that processes the vectors were used in a simple wireframe test. First the vector to the main vehicle would be drawn, then the one or two turrets in question and finally the vector of each round that leaves the weapon. Admittedly there is the problem that the momentum of the small turret is tragically wrong but assume in the test that the turret is merely pointed off at an angle from the main gun. Firing rounds should mimic historical documented action. Yet, no such accuracy is noted.
However, I don't have that code. I am a retired software manager, senior engineer and software consultant. I don't want that code without compensation.
Okay, sorry about that but it did help to summarize my thoughts once again on the issue. Versus, you know looking stuff up on the web.
My favorite tank is a Lightning. Just sayin.
|