Possible multi turret solution

[2frame]

ok i guess the only way to make a virdict on this is to say how much more enjotible would the game be with multi-turrets compared to how much work it would take to design everything multi turrets needs to work.....which ever is great should decide whether or not to do it. if the former outweighs the latter, then for christs sake i say do it. if the latter outweighs the former then forget it.

drath has spoken

[HLG Dale]

my idea for a souliton (which i was going to post a week ago but i went on holiday and forgot until now ) ball joints picture follows with better detail

also, i know my idea is really, really complex to intergate into the game...(i dunno why but you will expalain why but im telling you now that i understand :rolleyes: )

[Zarel]

...erm, how would ball joints help?

[whippersnapper]

.

IMHO redoing the body models to accommodate multi-turrets is K.I.S.S. re-design.

Introducing ball-joint mechanics does not change the need to redo the body models but adds huge layers of complexification to unnecessarily simulate multiple, discrete, turret elevational, roll, pitch and yaw movements and the rotational motion of the turret in the azimuth plane. For this reason I believe the addition of this ball-joint proposition to the current standard connectors implementation turns the whole proposition into something resembling a "Rube Goldberg Machine" - without the fun and humor of that deliberate act of over-engineering. Anyway, that's how I'm perceiving it and maybe I'm terribly mistaken. O_O

'Course ball-joints are commonly used in the design of toy tanks and miniatures - like in this LEGO tank: http://www.collectiondx.com/node/1070


Regards, whip

[HLG Dale]

well then you can rule out my idea... (the ball joint one)
...but heres another, i dunno what to say at the picture explains itself pretty well...
except for that fact that the idea was you put wepons on the red...

[Avestron]

Is it really desirable to have multiple turrets firing at different targets from the same platform? If weapons need to point in the same direction (similar to any twin weapon) then it would be a lot simpler to get the graphical elements to add up.

I personally think that one of the cleanest ways to implement multiple weapons graphically is the introduction of a turret part.

This could either be researched and applied as a completely seperate part or it could be applied automatically.

Example turret configurations:
- - - Light Body - - -

single sub-light - - - - (one sub-light weapon (machine gun))
single light - - (one light weapon (heavy machine gun or light cannon))
twin sub-light - - - - - (two light weapons side by side (twin machine gun))

- - - Medium Body - - -

single medium - - - -(one medium weapon (assualt gun or medium cannon))
twin light - - - - - - - (two light weapons side by side (twin HMG or HMG and Flashlight))
light plus sub-light - (core light weapon and one sub-light weapon to one side (HMG and MG)
light plus 2 sub-light (core light weapon and one sub-light weapon to each side (light cannon + 2x machine guns)
3 x sub-light - - - - - (triangular turret into which 3 light weapons are inserted (3 x machine gun)
4 x sub-light - - - - - (quad variant of triangular turret)

- - - Heavy Body - - -single medium - - - -(one medium weapon (assualt gun or medium cannon))

single heavy - - - - - (one heavy weapon (howitzer)) -
twin medium - - - - - (two medium weapons side by side (twin Assault Guns))
medium plus light - (core medium weapon and one light weapon to one side (Assault Gun and HMG)
medium plus 2 light (core medium weapon and one light weapon to each side (Assault Gun + 2x light cannons)
3 x light - - - - - (triangular turret into which 3 light weapons are inserted (3 x light mortar (pepperpot))
4 x light - - - - - (quad variant of triangular turret)

- - - Superheavy - - -

Superheavy weapon - (one superheavy weapon (Plasma cannon))
Twin heavy - - - - - - -(twin heavy weapons (Twin heavy cannon)
Trio medium - - - - - -(3 x medium weapons (triplet assault guns)
Quad medium - - - - - (4 x medium weapons (quadruplet assault guns)
heavy plus 2 medium
heavy plus 4 light
etc.

- - -

Problems:

Pies would need to be remade such that they no longer include the turret itself - instead it includes the barrel part of the weapon.

I think I'll abandon 'the other thing' for now and focus on producing a twin light turret and two light weapons (probably machine gun and flamer).

I ran out of steam - yes its incomplete - zzz

[Crushy]

Using 2 turrets is a must if you want to use 2 heavy cannons for instance. The only modern weapons that use twin and quad turrets are ballistic AA guns and battleships. The reason for this is that these vehicles either have to engage really large targets (other battleships, land bombardment) or put a lot of bullets ASAP into a small really fast target (bullet dispersal is an advantage).

Stick 2 heavy cannons in a single tank turret though, and you'll just have one shell hit the enemy on left track and the other the right track. :rolleyes:

You could have rotating heavy cannons and double the fire-rate compared to a single one, but that would either be awesome or retarded (either awesomely retarded or retardedly awesome ).

.
'Course ball-joints are commonly used in the design of toy tanks and miniatures - like in this LEGO tank: http://www.collectiondx.com/node/1070

whippersnapper, try to avoid posting anything related to LEGOs in a thread I'm likely to visit. I have serious issues with LEGOs. Especially if they're awesome.

[lav_coyote25]

now youve gone and done it!! xD now for sure it will happen. xD xD

[2frame]

i feel i must qoute myself here.

ok i guess the only way to make a virdict on this is to say how much more enjotible would the game be with multi-turrets compared to how much work it would take to design everything multi turrets needs to work.....which ever is great should decide whether or not to do it. if the former outweighs the latter, then for christs sake i say do it. if the latter outweighs the former then forget it.

drath has spoken

there is just no other way to decide whether to do it or not. lets be logical people

[winsrp]

well i played this game when the old multiple turret solution was in place, which was latter removed...

i thought this was not actually bad, but it only had the problem that most of the time a turret will turn so much that it will render inside of the body of the other turret, so why not have turrets on the second position have a maximum angle to shoot at... so you can have a body with 2 levels where the #1 turret can have 360 rang and the lower turret can have -120 and + 120 angle.

  T1
  ===.     T2
|        ' \=====.
«««««««««««««

Another solution takes me to unreal tournament 2004, but must not be seen in the same scale as in ut2004. so the example is the leviathan, which is a massive armor with 1 main weapon and 4 mini cannons (yeah way to many but its just an example), so you can have the main weapon be the big weapon and the secondary one, be a scaled down, version of any other weapon... so for example, imagine a body that has 4 turrets stands with a mini version of the weapons you select, lets say 50% scale down. and of course 50% of the power down. So you will end up with something like this

 .---.            .---.
| T2 \_____/ T3 |
|                       |
|          T1         |
|       _____       |
|T4 /          \ T5| 
 '---'               '---'

Again this could be mixed up, and have T2-T5 have a shooting view angle, the shotting angle and the scaling of the weapons would depend on the body they are using and not on the weapons itself. then you don't have to force the tank to turn in order to shoot something that its not in its angle, just make it shoot if it is in angle since the current tank movement kindda sucks with them having to move forward to actually turn.

Also same can be done to walls and standpoints, where you can have multiple turret standpoint or something like that.

Edit, to actually view the ascii grafics, you need to select reply to this post... funny.

Edit (by Zarel): Fixed the ASCII graphics for you.

[Crushy]

well i played this game when the old multiple turret solution was in place, which was latter removed...

i thought this was not actually bad, but it only had the problem that most of the time a turret will turn so much that it will render inside of the body of the other turret, so why not have turrets on the second position have a maximum angle to shoot at... so you can have a body with 2 levels where the #1 turret can have 360 rang and the lower turret can have -120 and + 120 angle.

Code: Select all

  T1
  ===.    T2
|     ' \=====.

«««««««««««««

Another solution takes me to unreal tournament 2004, but must not be seen in the same scale as in ut2004. so the example is the leviathan, which is a massive armor with 1 main weapon and 4 mini cannons (yeah way to many but its just an example), so you can have the main weapon be the big weapon and the secondary one, be a scaled down, version of any other weapon... so for example, imagine a body that has 4 turrets stands with a mini version of the weapons you select, lets say 50% scale down. and of course 50% of the power down. So you will end up with something like this

Code: Select all

    .---.       .---.
    | T2 \_____/ T3 |
    |               |
    |       T1      |
    |     _____     |
    | T4 /     \ T5 |
    '---'       '---'

Again this could be mixed up, and have T2-T5 have a shooting view angle, the shotting angle and the scaling of the weapons would depend on the body they are using and not on the weapons itself. then you don't have to force the tank to turn in order to shoot something that its not in its angle, just make it shoot if it is in angle since the current tank movement kindda sucks with them having to move forward to actually turn.

Also same can be done to walls and standpoints, where you can have multiple turret standpoint or something like that.

Edit, to actually view the ascii grafics, you need to select reply to this post... funny.

Use the code tags

Edit: strange, it still fails.
Edit2: Figured it out, When you are creating a post your font is NOT monospace, which means spaces aren't always the same. Posts already posted appear to be monospace for some strange reason.

[winsrp]

well, thanks for the fix there bud... the thing is that i have not changed my font at all... but well, this forum things are quite weird sometimes. Thanks anyway.

[praefectus]

Well I really have fun with multiturrets in my WZ21k games!
Yesterday I made a big slow moving fleet of tracked Dragon/Vengeance fortresses each with 3 guns/missiles.
Being sooo slow, they really wheren't very useful, but definitely fun !

Couldn't it be made optional in skirmish games to allow multi turrets ?
Much in the same way you can adjust the number of certain buildings.

To me it doesn't matter if the graphics aren´t perfect as game play is of higher priority to me.

[Hamstertron]

Hi there.
I've been mulling over the idea of multi-turrets and I think there are several reasons they appeal to people. Some players want an uber unit capable of spewing a barrage of lethal fireworks that can single-handedly take out a base (i.e. the "mobile fortress"). Others want units that combine the advantages of several weapon systems while minimising the disadvantages (e.g. The arty that can defend itself, or a mid-tier tank that can handle multiple enemy unit types).

The trick is to satisfy both, of course.

This thread has generated lots of ideas to do with how multi turrets can be managed and I think a lot of these ideas have a place in balancing one or the other of the categories above. The below lists are intended as a kind of summary with my own ideas injected, where appropriate.

Here are my two-cents on balance:

• Bodies should have turrets limited by tiers, firing arcs and broad weapon types (such as direct fire/arty).
• This should be used to prevent certain overpowered combos (e.g. Arty + Tier 3 turrets at the same time).
• Turret arcs should be limited in order to encourage tactical movement such as flank attacks by light, fast, single turret vehicles. Whilst the main turret should always have 360 degree rotation, I think there is tactical merit in not letting the other turrets do this.
• Push the boat out: Directional armour? e.g. Vehicles have weaker armour from the rear?

And on control:

• If we limit units to only fire a single weapon at a time, then they should be able to pick the best weapon for the target.
• If units can fire multiple weapons then we should develop a system whereby holding down keys while targetting will modify the attack behaviour. For example, clicking on a target to attack with main turret but alt-clicking a second target so that the secondary turrets will fire at it, should it come into range.
• We may need new behaviours in the droid right-click menu to govern common issues such as which weapon range to use when deciding how close to get to a target
• Push the boat out: Maybe alt-clicking opens a radial menu over the target where you'll see icons for an artillery attack; attack with longest range, non-arty; attack with shortest range/all weapons; Or whatever weapons are relevent to the units you're controlling. Select the weapons, click "go!" and only the units armed with the relevent turrets will attack

And on fighting fire with fire... extinguishers. In order to bring balance to the force maybe we should consider adding features which reduce or neutralise all the firepower multi-turrets would add:

• ECM weapons would be non-lethal but could interfere with accuracy, rate of fire, mobility etc
• Perhaps some ECM like cloaking or stealth could help some units avoid being shot at by uber-units
• Some existing weapons could be retro-fitted with ECM-like effects e.g. being on fire reduces visibility/accuracy.
• Turrets could stop working depending on how damaged a unit was, but be restored upon repair
• Push the boat out, maybe: receving a hit from a weapon specifically designed against your unit type (e.g. vehicle hit by anti-tank weapon) could impede your weapons reloading, like the cast-bar knockback in World of Warcraft. This affect should be moderated by armour and what proportion of the unit's health would be lost by the hit (so a lancer hitting a light/med body would suppress it, but a heavy or super-heavy body could shrug it off), and probably unit experience would help counteract this affect, too.
• Perhaps giving up some firepower to mount sensors instead of weapons could ameliorate ECM effects (although you might ban sensor-arty combos as per my second "balance" bullet above)

What I love about warzone is the tactical element and my main concern about multi-turrets is how much of that they will rob us of. Perhaps multi turrets are inevitable - so I intend the above as ideas for adding the tactics back, in the face of overwhelming firepower.

[Olrox]

I'll add rotation limitation, model some hundreds of combinations of multi-turret guns with upgradeable features and fully customizable armor, make high-detailed units, make customizable buildings as well as adding teamcolor to them, add factions and customizable tech trees.
:rolleyes:
Not for wz2100 though.

It took some time before I've decided that modding wz is too complicated because of the numbersome limitations and issues and... Well, it reminds me of a bureaucratic work where you've got a hell of a lot of ideas and you must cut pieces of them off because there's some bad guy who doesn't like new things (that would be WZ's engine).
It'll take many years and yet, I'll have an independent games company with some associates I'm working with right now. It's a dream of mine, you know, I'll make games. When I've got anything good I'll post it on the off-topic board so you guys can say what you think. Hopefully, people who have been here a long time, and share at least some of my feelings will still be here... Whip, Zarel, Elio, Tiuz, Metalbeast, Astorian, Xanax... I've had many ideas for wz yet I could not find enough willpower to make something that would probably be limited to a small public and would not reach its full potential.

Anyway,
I think Multi turrets will always be a controversial feature cuz it will have numerous bugs, unless somebody remakes a whole lot of the game mechanics and balance quite a lot of rotational limits (despite ADDING rotational limits). As such, there won't be a solution for multi turrets. There would be a LOT of solutions, even to problems that are still out of knowledge.

Wz2100 reminds me of a shopping center that opened here on Curitiba... They were building it, it was huge, It's the biggest on Brasil I think, and they wouldn't finish its construction before mother's day, so they've put it all together from one day to another, the fire-prevention systems were not installed, the firefighters hadn't approved the blueprints (that is against the law on any commercial building) and the escalators where not operational. They've paid a massive fine because of that, but the earnings of the holiday surpassed the expenditures as well as the fine. Until now there are still many things unfinished and many things that won't be finished properly. Despite the finantial part, in which it was a failure, WZ2100 seems just as unfinished and patched and scarred and unpolished as this shopping center, to me.

And that is a pity, imho.