Can we put bigger guns on smaller cores?

[lucagrabacr]

Like an L gun on an S core, L gun on an M core, etc

[JohnnyTazer]

Yes, there is nothing tying them to a core. But a L gun needs a L radar, and L gunner seat, and takes up more space, and is heavier, etc.  So you have freedom, but doesn't mean will be optimal.

[lucagrabacr]

46 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

Yes, there is nothing tying them to a core. But a L gun needs a L radar, and L gunner seat, and takes up more space, and is heavier, etc.  So you have freedom, but doesn't mean will be optimal.

Thanks Johnny, so it's totally possible for smaller ships to fight with or even outrange bigger ships then I guess, since radar lock range differs between core sizes

[JohnnyTazer]

2 minutes ago, lucagrabacr said:

Thanks Johnny, so it's totally possible for smaller ships to fight with or even outrange bigger ships then I guess, since radar lock range differs between core sizes

Most likely, but keep in mind, the smaller core you have, the less room, and its hard to make a ship that can "do it all" with smaller build sizes. Like go in atmo, in space, shoot, accelerate fast enough, brake fast enough, etc.  So in a sense bigger will always be "Better" in my opinion, but only to a small scale degree.  And there is always the factor if the person you are fighting has poor skills or built a poor ship, haha.  Which is very good in my opinion.  The more variables you throw in for someone to win fights, the better.  Not knowing if you are gonna win a pvp fight going in should be the case a decent amount of the time, and randomess leads to more replayability and fun imo.

[lucagrabacr]

Just now, JohnnyTazer said:

Most likely, but keep in mind, the smaller core you have, the less room, and its hard to make a ship that can "do it all" with smaller build sizes. Like go in atmo, in space, shoot, accelerate fast enough, brake fast enough, etc.  So in a sense bigger will always be "Better" in my opinion, but only to a small scale degree.  And there is always the factor if the person you are fighting has poor skills or built a poor ship, haha.  Which is very good in my opinion.  The more variables you throw in for someone to win fights, the better.  Not knowing if you are gonna win a pvp fight going in should be the case a decent amount of the time, and randomess leads to more replayability and fun imo.

Yeah I was factoring all those variables to figure out what kinda ship I / most people would have depending on their needs / organization's needs, haven't seen how big some of the higher-tier elements are yet, but I'm guessing all of them can fit on an S core to some degree to a reasonable effectiveness if pure firepower / PvP efficiency isn't the intent of the ship, but I guess an M core ship would be more reasonable for an all-around ship that would do well in PvP without being too expensive

 

Can totally see solo players (they need gunners or stand up from their seat, I know) or smaller groups using smaller ships to either hit and run or just runaway from a bigger threat while still being able to shoot / outrange them, or bigger organizations using a bunch of sniper small ships as a tactic or overall strategy

[Strumfex]

The Core class defines only the size of the construct. The rest is just management  S cores have more than enough space for everything. In my short experience i realise the core defines what type of vessel you need . XS for hovercars ,  S is for a solo vessel , M for small groups ships , L and XL for large corps battlecruisers or freighters. This apply not only for vessels but also for industry. If you play solo for example , you will extremely rare need an L or XL facility is better to simply buy the thing you need. 

[CAPEBOK]

it's better to put on a small core, XS and S gunnery 

[joaocordeiro]

Something PVPers dont want you to know:

The smaller the core, the closer you can identify it and shoot. 

 

So a XS core can identify and fire on a L core well before the L core can identify the XS core. 

This is a broken mechanic that states that on a 1 vs 1 battle the smaller, more agile core will be able to fire all its ammo before the larger core can even start firing. 

 

XS weapons???? 

Whats the advantage of carrying a 8km weapon when the enemy can obliterate you from 40km?

How small is a chance to miss when it's calculated based on angular velocity (virtually zero at 40km?)

 

If you cant have a L radar and a M or L railgun, you dont even need to bother having guns. You are just cannon fodder. 

[Kezzle]

It's worth bearing in mind that the current combat model is a first iteration. The roadmap has a second version as one of the next things for them to get sorted, before CvC and AvA combat, even, IIRC. Hopefully, that version will have more restrictions (by making things bigger, probably) on targeting radars, and have room for a rich EWar environment, and that the whole will give every ship size a role in a brawl.

 

At the moment, tracking and evasion are probably way out of whack: there's no way (short of dumb luck on a vanishingly small probability) a railgun at 100+km should be able to hit an XS core with 8-plus Gs of acceleration; it just won't be where the railgun was aiming by the time the rounds arrive, since its volume of potential maneuver would be so large as to make prediction near-impossible.

 

But then, there's a lot of ship design that's going to go out the window when the placeholders are junked. Gold and Marble for armour? Not commonly employed in any setting with pretensions of reality, and DU is desperately trying to be realistic as far as is possible, with newtonian physics in space and requiring radars and controls as well as guns. Lots of work to be done by NQ and once that's done, lots more work to be done by the shipwrights and test pilots.

 

It's also worth pointing out that littler non-railguns are just as effective against overmatched targets. But at the moment jaeocordeiro is correct to at least some degree: smaller cores are better for actual fighting.