tank design and layout idea

[elio]

as there's a need for multi weapon bodies i think it's time to revise the whole style not only model based.

a weapon should have a realistic shape which allows it to yaw the turret and pitch the barrel.

cannon and mini rocket

we should consider the weapons height if it can be mounted on the specific slot

then for each mount point of the body we should restrict it's rotation.

this can be done easily: do not allow artillery on secondary slots and set the max angle in body.txt
or complicated: do collision detection with different pitch and yaw and work out the maximum angle

how do you like the proposals (including design)? tell us..
polycount is around 2000 but we can reduce it significantly by using normal maps so don't worry about that

[elio]

in comparison:

[Kamaze]

I don't think that this "roundish" look really fits to the game. Looks more like a WW2 tank. Modern tanks have edges and plain planes, to use the armour more effective. Take a look on a M1A2 Abrams or the Leopard 2. Same goes for buildings.

[elio]

agreed

[Mysteryem]

I think that I would have to agree with Kamaze that the round style doesn't suit very well. However that missile weapon looks great. But yes droids need a huge overhall and so do their textures.
How are you going to achieve this though? Would you perhaps have one body where a slightly different pie file is selected when another turret is added? Or would you have one body that can support multiple turrets or a single turret, or finally would some bodies have to have say 3 turrets minimum on them and then some with 1 turret minimum?

I'm intrigued to see where this thread goes from now.

[a human]

... Or would you have one body that can support multiple turrets or a single turret, or finally would some bodies have to have say 3 turrets minimum on them and then some with 1 turret minimum?

wouldn't it be better to have a in game difference in having one turret vs. four... for instance, a tank with 4 turrets should, in theory, go nearly twice as slow... correct.
if you take that into consideration, you don't have to really make that many changes to the body... except perhaps putting a different texture on a area when it doesn't have a turret on top of it.

Also i agree that the turrets are too bulbous however, i think the bodies don't need that much more work.

[elio]

wouldn't it be better to have a in game difference in having one turret vs. four... for instance, a tank with 4 turrets should, in theory, go nearly twice as slow... correct.

the current implementation does it that way already

Would you perhaps have one body where a slightly different pie file is selected when another turret is added?

is a very good idea but causes some work to update each body every time. I'm not really sure there..

would some bodies have to have say 3 turrets minimum on them and then some with 1 turret minimum?

don't you mean maximum?

regards
elio

[Mysteryem]

don't you mean maximum?

regards
elio

Nope, I did mean minimum, I was thinking that you could have dedicated bodies that are designed to hold multiple turrets, but then they must have a specific number of turrets on them.

[elio]

ah, yes i like this idea too

[whippersnapper]

.
The history of multi-turreted tanks is very interesting. (I define as a tank with more than a 2 weap package.)

It begins in the 1930's with the Soviet T-28 and T-35. Both were dismal failures on the battlefield for a host of reasons.

T-28: http://www.russianwarrior.com/STMMain.h ... tory.htm&1

T-35: http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?opt ... 50&lang=en

Even so, it currently has a promising relevance in the Land System Dynamics Multi-Weapon Turret
ICV’s/APC’s:

http://www.baesystemsdyn.co.za/index.php?programs4

As you can imagine the basic engineering approach over the course of 80 years has
changed dramatically. You will be struck with just how differently the various weapon
packages are currently tightly integrated when compared to what was done 80 years ago.

I have one question - where in the tech tree would this option be first introduced ?

Regards, whipper

[Per]

Another idea is to make additional weapons into special supplementary side-arms, similar to how VTOL weapons are special version of the current weapons. Those could have built-in restrictions on angles and combinations with existing weapons. For example: Droids can be equipped with flame-throwers that can only fire in a very narrow angle in front of the droid, or cannons can have a small mg turret on top (like all modern tanks have).

[Zarel]

Or we could just limit slots by weight.

i.e. a heavy body can either have a heavy weapon, or two weapons: a medium weapon and a light weapon.

This has been suggested before, and I just completely forgot about the multiturret code.

[a human]

i.e. a heavy body can either have a heavy weapon, or two weapons: a medium weapon and a light weapon.

What??? then its physically impossible two heavy turrets on the same body.
in some case one wants a fortress that can barely move for certain applications

[Zarel]

What??? then its physically impossible two heavy turrets on the same body.
in some case one wants a fortress that can barely move for certain applications

Yeah, that's the point. We don't want you to have two heavy turrets on the same body; that'd be unbalanced.

If you want a fortress that can barely move, just stick a plasma cannon on Dragon Tracks.

On second thought, you'd barely ever be able to hit your opponents. Maybe a Gauss cannon would be better.

[whippersnapper]

. Even so, it currently has a promising relevance in the Land System Dynamics Multi-Weapon Turret
ICV’s/APC’s:

http://www.baesystemsdyn.co.za/index.php?programs4

To follow up on that point.....

Throughout the RL 80 year history of Multi-Turrent Tanks there's been a dual purpose-goal: battlefield multi-offensive juggernaut and APC.

The attention in these discussions is always on the former which is to say - what about APC functionality for these bad boys ?
Only one thing with that idea is that ideally you'd want an enhanced command screen where you preset the Borg complement deployment as a % of the Multi-Turrets Health Decay on top of a manual function to do it at any time.

Below are 3 pics of a modern multi-weap turret outfitted like so:

* 30mm machine cannon
* 7.62 co-axail machine gun
* 3x Ingwe Anti-tank missiles
* 40mm Automatic Grenade Launcher (AGL)
* Additional to the weapons, six smoke launchers are also fitted.

Ammo complement:

* 30mm Cannon - 300 (100/200 split between different types)
* 40mm AGL -100
* 7.62mm Machine Gun - 2000
* AT Missiles - 3

Thinking out-side the conventional box this turret engineering provides these system benefits over the TA-35 approach:

* Increase space inside the vehicle - no turret basket using up space inside the vehicle
* Better protection for the crew - vehicle provides the protection, no weak points introduced by the turret
* Less weight - No heavy protection is required for the turret. This increases the system's mobility
* Increased firepower with high performance weapons
* Lower profile provides air transportability

regards, whipper.