open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Rescale the size of battleship turrets...
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.07.22 15:31:00 - [1]
 

For all the time and effort gone into the new turret system, it would have been nice to have battleship turrets easier to spot... In relation to the size of the ship...

It's not an urgent issue and I suppose it's probably an Art Dpt thing, but their far too small!

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.07.22 15:33:00 - [2]
 


StukaBee
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.07.22 21:16:00 - [3]
 

Turrets look pathetically undersized on battleships.

Here's an idea of how battleship turrets ought to compare to hull size:

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute

Posted - 2011.07.23 08:30:00 - [4]
 

Yes, yes, and yes.

Give.

Toovhon
Posted - 2011.07.23 12:26:00 - [5]
 

I've never seen the new turrets unless I zoom my BS in so far it stops me from being able to see anything else. That's just plain dumb.

Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.07.23 18:34:00 - [6]
 

the size makes them look like secondary weapons. Not primary weapons. I understand that having cartoon like proportions would ruin it but reallife battleships have main guns that are quite viable

http://tapety.webz.cz/lode_soubory/battleship.jpg

Omara Otawan
Posted - 2011.07.23 19:23:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Sephiroth CloneIIV
I understand that having cartoon like proportions would ruin it



And still, frigates tend to have exactly that cartoonish look, especially with autocannons.

Its fine on destroyers, but looking at my frigates makes me zoom out in disgust.

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:15:00 - [8]
 

Thanks for the support so far. Not a massive issue but I'd imagine a lot agree that they could look a little bigger?

Darryl Ward
Posted - 2011.07.25 20:04:00 - [9]
 

I don't really fly BS, but it would make sense to see some big honking guns on them. They should look menacing.

Egilmonsc
Minmatar
Massively Mob

Posted - 2011.07.26 04:40:00 - [10]
 

Supported for scale~

Arushia
Nova Labs
New Eden Research.
Posted - 2011.07.26 05:14:00 - [11]
 

Supported. My Paladin deserves bigger tachyons.

Zoe Ardent
Posted - 2011.07.26 07:38:00 - [12]
 

In case of turrets, bigger is better Razz

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.26 07:41:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 26/07/2011 07:55:53
Wonderful, another argument based on Real LifeTM logic. For a sci fi spaceship game. Wonderful.
These arguments inevitably lead to anime like stupidity like this:
Yamato

And I would rather not allow EVE to degenerate into Yet Another Gundam Game.

Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.

EDIT: Not to mention, RL battleships were not much bigger than a small EVE cruiser, or destroyer. Exactly where you think the sizes looked 'right'.


Flynn Fetladral
Royal Order of Security Specialists
Posted - 2011.07.26 08:13:00 - [14]
 

The problem with scale is that it's deceptive without reference. Just because a ship is bigger dose not mean that the turret needs to be larger. The picture posted in the thread of the US battleship 'USS Iowa', has a calibre size on it's main guns of 410mm, almost half the size of Minmatar medium artillery. Many of the ships in EVE Online have totally borked scale. Maybe CCP can confirm this, but I don't know if the turrets have been modelled to scale or not. However, this might well be a case of the ships in EVE Online are just so much bigger than even the largest of sea fairing warships afloat today.

Manique
Caldari
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2011.07.26 09:38:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Flynn Fetladral
The problem with scale is that it's deceptive without reference. Just because a ship is bigger dose not mean that the turret needs to be larger. The picture posted in the thread of the US battleship 'USS Iowa', has a calibre size on it's main guns of 410mm, almost half the size of Minmatar medium artillery. Many of the ships in EVE Online have totally borked scale. Maybe CCP can confirm this, but I don't know if the turrets have been modelled to scale or not. However, this might well be a case of the ships in EVE Online are just so much bigger than even the largest of sea fairing warships afloat today.


scale is what makes them appear undersized. not supported

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.07.26 15:29:00 - [16]
 

Yes, my apoc looks pathetic. I can't even zoom in enough to see the guns.

This needs to be done


Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Shadow Confederation
Posted - 2011.07.26 18:28:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren


Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.




Actually...yes you can.

Your just not looking in the right spots.

: O P

Maz3r Rakum
Gallente
The Imperial Fedaykin
Posted - 2011.07.26 19:27:00 - [18]
 


Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.07.27 00:17:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Sephiroth CloneIIV on 27/07/2011 00:26:35
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 26/07/2011 07:55:53
Wonderful, another argument based on Real LifeTM logic. For a sci fi spaceship game. Wonderful.
These arguments inevitably lead to anime like stupidity like this:
Yamato

And I would rather not allow EVE to degenerate into Yet Another Gundam Game.

Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.

EDIT: Not to mention, RL battleships were not much bigger than a small EVE cruiser, or destroyer. Exactly where you think the sizes looked 'right'.




A star destroyer has a bunch of little guns on the sides and all around (I know this because I am a nerd). Thats more of choice of guns and roles then saying that arbitrary a large ship doesn't need larger cannons. Lots of small guns might be better for smaller targets (frigs and fighters of the rebels, it is called a destroyer after all). And I think the ship might not have the largest guns because it is also has more of a role of a carrier. star destroyers if you watched the movies are used for transporting many tie fighters, troopers and even those giant 4 footed walkers, and the smaller 2 footed ones. Ever noticed that before the empire does anything on the ground a fleet of star destroyers are in space?

So it isn't a literal battleship, if you think about it. The galatic empire engineers could have chosen to have the same hull, get rid of the large cargo/troop/fighter bays and opt for larger reactors or ammo storage to power 8 large main cannons able to blast equally impressive holes in the largest of ships.

Furthermore for big ship on other big ship combat it makes more sense to have the largest caliber guns, for piercing shields or armor. Use a pea shooter that is normally used for swating flies and its just going to bounce.

Just seroulsy look at real battleships, the 'main' guns are decently sized. not all guns are but those are secondary weapons and doorstops, not to be confused with main armament (secondary weapons eve does not really deal with save rockets, only main guns are counted with a hard limit of 8).

Not only does having decently sized guns on a ship make it look cooler. It adds a bit of realism. Furtherpoint the presence of other things out of scale is only a further sign that more things should defiantly be fixed in that department.

On the same subject frig guns should maybe be reduced in size (though personally I think while maybe a bit too large are still more in scale then others for being main weapons). And defiantly carriers should be five times larger then they are currently (so 5 times larger then a battleship), and super carriers should be 10 times as massive as a regular carrier.

Last Star Fighter
Posted - 2011.07.27 02:04:00 - [20]
 


Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.27 05:26:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Sephiroth CloneIIV
Edited by: Sephiroth CloneIIV on 27/07/2011 00:26:35
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 26/07/2011 07:55:53
Wonderful, another argument based on Real LifeTM logic. For a sci fi spaceship game. Wonderful.
These arguments inevitably lead to anime like stupidity like this:
Yamato

And I would rather not allow EVE to degenerate into Yet Another Gundam Game.

Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.

EDIT: Not to mention, RL battleships were not much bigger than a small EVE cruiser, or destroyer. Exactly where you think the sizes looked 'right'.




A star destroyer has a bunch of little guns on the sides and all around (I know this because I am a nerd). Thats more of choice of guns and roles then saying that arbitrary a large ship doesn't need larger cannons. Lots of small guns might be better for smaller targets (frigs and fighters of the rebels, it is called a destroyer after all). And I think the ship might not have the largest guns because it is also has more of a role of a carrier. star destroyers if you watched the movies are used for transporting many tie fighters, troopers and even those giant 4 footed walkers, and the smaller 2 footed ones. Ever noticed that before the empire does anything on the ground a fleet of star destroyers are in space?

So it isn't a literal battleship, if you think about it. The galatic empire engineers could have chosen to have the same hull, get rid of the large cargo/troop/fighter bays and opt for larger reactors or ammo storage to power 8 large main cannons able to blast equally impressive holes in the largest of ships.

Furthermore for big ship on other big ship combat it makes more sense to have the largest caliber guns, for piercing shields or armor. Use a pea shooter that is normally used for swating flies and its just going to bounce.

Just seroulsy look at real battleships, the 'main' guns are decently sized. not all guns are but those are secondary weapons and doorstops, not to be confused with main armament (secondary weapons eve does not really deal with save rockets, only main guns are counted with a hard limit of 8).

Not only does having decently sized guns on a ship make it look cooler. It adds a bit of realism. Furtherpoint the presence of other things out of scale is only a further sign that more things should defiantly be fixed in that department.

On the same subject frig guns should maybe be reduced in size (though personally I think while maybe a bit too large are still more in scale then others for being main weapons). And defiantly carriers should be five times larger then they are currently (so 5 times larger then a battleship), and super carriers should be 10 times as massive as a regular carrier.


Star destroyer isn't a battleship? What battleships does the Empire use then?... wait... I'm not going to let you draw me into a fictitious sci-fi argument that will end up in a star destroyer vs enterprise debate. The point is that you only get ridiculous sized (proportionally) guns in Japanese anime. Your real life example doesn't apply because you Eve cruisers are bigger than the USS IOWA.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.27 05:32:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Kaelie Onren


Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.




Actually...yes you can.

Your just not looking in the right spots.

: O P


EXACTLY my point.

You can't see them without LOOKING for them, (with a microscope). As it should be.

Rushnik
Minmatar
Anhalter's Minions
Posted - 2011.07.27 15:25:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Rushnik on 27/07/2011 15:32:10
Originally by: Kaelie Onren


EXACTLY my point.

You can't see them without LOOKING for them, (with a microscope). As it should be.


Star Destroyer suck. End of Discussion.

OT:

I fully approve this idea. And taking a look at this is imo worth it before I have to start explaining it again.

DeftCrow Redriver
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2011.07.27 19:40:00 - [24]
 

Battleship turrets look like they're at the correct scale on cruisers or battle cruisers. So supported.

Sephiroth CloneIIV
Rim Worlds Republic
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.07.27 20:32:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Sephiroth CloneIIV on 27/07/2011 20:55:23
speaking of the yamato and iowa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato1945.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg

notice the 3 large gun battery's, those are main armament. The smaller things are pea-shooters or fly swatters used for shooting planes, boats or other small targets. You don't use the smaller ones on other battleships or cruisers, unless you want to knock on their door to announce your presence.

Having sensibly sized guns simply looks better and serves functional purpose.


Add to that the star destroyer is more analogous to carrier, and a literal flying empire base then a ship focused on large guns. (ever notice how carriers don't have guns the size of battleships or vise versia BS's can't carry as much planes, always a tradeoff for what one uses for space)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Destroyer

"At 1,600 meters long, Imperial-class Star Destroyers are armed with turbolasers, ion cannons and tractor beam projectors.[3] They carry 72 TIE fighters, numerous ground forces (including stormtroopers, 20 AT-ATs and 30 AT-STs), a prefabricated base for rapid deployment to planetary surfaces and a variety of support and landing craft.[3]"






Rushnik
Minmatar
Anhalter's Minions
Posted - 2011.07.27 22:00:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Rushnik on 27/07/2011 23:23:02
Edited by: Rushnik on 27/07/2011 23:21:20
Originally by: DeftCrow Redriver
Battleship turrets look like they're at the correct scale on cruisers or battle cruisers. So supported.


Made a comparison myself.

The 800mms are bigger then the 1400mms... Confused


Nariya Kentaya
Coalition Of Gentlemen.

Posted - 2011.07.28 01:09:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Kaelie Onren


Can you see the turrets on a star destroyer? No, and so it should be.




Actually...yes you can.

Your just not looking in the right spots.

: O P


EXACTLY my point.

You can't see them without LOOKING for them, (with a microscope). As it should be.


the imperial star destroyer is a carrier strictly used to enforce imperial law in an area.

theyre guns are NOT small, just theyre TURBO laser banks, the big ones, are mounted on the SIDES because they are most often employed in broadsides, episode 4 (or a new hope, depending on how old of a fan you are) the laser that were shooting at the tantive 4 (a cruiser more or less) were regular laser cannons that are mounted all over the destroyer for small-ship engagement, if the ISD had used its main cannons the tantive 4 would have been ripped in half.

also, going to the point of size, the "battleships" employed by the empire would be more along the lines of victory-class cruisers, which are about one fifth the size of a ISD but covered in turbo-lasers, and the acclamator class, slightly smaller and used as a light-battleship to suport the victory-class. so yeah, battleship guns need to be bigger, and carriers should be larger.

IN ARGUEMENT to your original arguement, the battleship Iowa has big guns for killing big ships (and bombarding entire enemy fleets, and the bigger a ship is, the bigger its guns HAVE TO BE in order to counter other ships of the same weight class, in other words, a decent battleship cannon (whether laser or artillery or wahtnot) should look as if it would have the ability to rip a smaller ship in half without effort (not saying it SHOULD be able to, just as far as appearance wise, because lets face it, shields and armor can do funny things)

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.28 01:55:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 28/07/2011 02:04:19

Originally by: Nariya Kentaya
Sci-fi fiction argument


Not biting here. You have an impressive knowledge about SW lore, which means you have an impressive collection of SW fan literature. Congrats.

(so 200 turbolasers* on a ISD and still a "carrier"? Hmm, I think that the Lucasarts games created to date** would disagree with you)

But fiction justifications*** aside, do you actually have any REAL numbers on the sizes of the turbolasers? I would have thought that this would be the most obvious argument you can use. Ok, let me google that for you, and end your argument with a picture.

Gee, looks about the same (tiny) sizes as EVE ships huh. Funny that.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.



* According to THESEmodel specs, why the stress? Because SW lore is full of inconsitencies often which stir up a lot of fan debates. Non of which is our primary concern here, so don't use these for any basis of argument, just illustrating how futile a fictional lore argument can be.
** Star Wars Empire at War, Star Wars Rebellion, to name 2 that I know. Victory Class, Acclimator Class are just inferior ISDs in every way (according to fictional specs).
*** Unless you speak for LucasArts/Lucasfilms, you should not be commenting on what you think the roles of SW ships are, or their design methodologies, or their functions. Going down this path will turn this debate into a lore vs lore discussion, which should be left in the realm of SW geeks, as they rarely result in any meaningful conclusions.


Nariya Kentaya
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
Posted - 2011.07.28 04:38:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 28/07/2011 02:04:19

Originally by: Nariya Kentaya
Sci-fi fiction argument


Not biting here. You have an impressive knowledge about SW lore, which means you have an impressive collection of SW fan literature. Congrats.

(so 200 turbolasers* on a ISD and still a "carrier"? Hmm, I think that the Lucasarts games created to date** would disagree with you)

But fiction justifications*** aside, do you actually have any REAL numbers on the sizes of the turbolasers? I would have thought that this would be the most obvious argument you can use. Ok, let me google that for you, and end your argument with a picture.

Gee, looks about the same (tiny) sizes as EVE ships huh. Funny that.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.



* According to THESEmodel specs, why the stress? Because SW lore is full of inconsitencies often which stir up a lot of fan debates. Non of which is our primary concern here, so don't use these for any basis of argument, just illustrating how futile a fictional lore argument can be.
** Star Wars Empire at War, Star Wars Rebellion, to name 2 that I know. Victory Class, Acclimator Class are just inferior ISDs in every way (according to fictional specs).
*** Unless you speak for LucasArts/Lucasfilms, you should not be commenting on what you think the roles of SW ships are, or their design methodologies, or their functions. Going down this path will turn this debate into a lore vs lore discussion, which should be left in the realm of SW geeks, as they rarely result in any meaningful conclusions.




first off, the link is just them trying to use the type of special effects used in the movie to CREATE ideas about the lasers, AND you cut out half my arguement, and that is, that in RL, cannons on a ship are designed to defeat other ships of specific weight classes, as in, a US navy destroyers little artillery piece would take for-frakkin ever to do seveere structural damage to a battleship (unless you get a lucky shot off at at either fuel or ammunition storage), while a battleships cannons are designed to take out anything they can hit.

my whole point is that small cannons, regardless of the size of the ship they are equipped to, can only take down targets of an appropriate weight class, and considering that on a ship the size of a, lets say, abbadon, armor plating on a ship that size, just to ensure structural integrity, would be prettyd amn thick, meaning only REALLY BIG ASS guns would be able to punch a significant hole in it, so it just doesnt look right that battleship cannons are that small. the cannons, at the size they are at now, look like they could at most punch a couple tiny holes in another battleship, which doesnt even seem threatening, realistically, a gun that would do significant damage to an abbadon or appriopriate weight-classs ship would ahve to be massive, same with capital ships. theres a reason why battleships had the 4 (or 5, depending on what style battleship your talking about) had those huge artyillery cannons on them, while destroyers even today only have a couple single-barrel, artillery turrets.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.28 05:09:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 28/07/2011 06:06:57
Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 28/07/2011 05:12:23

Quote:
first off, the link is just them trying to use the type of special effects used in the movie to CREATE ideas about the lasers,


Did you actually read it instead of summarily assuming that I didn't? Hint jump to the part with the following line.

"It is also interesting to note that an early concept drawing of an Imperator Class Star Destroyer by Geoffrey Mandel describes three different sizes of laser cannons. Also note that there are a total of 200 TL cannons mounted on the vessel."

I was just providing it as a reference, like any good debater does. :) Just google for the rest if you want to read up on the other stuff about SW TLs.

Originally by: Nariya Kentaya
AND you cut out half my arguement,


Because your argement is silly. You are using Real Life logic to try to justify things in a science fiction genre. Essentially you are saying to all the film makers and Sci-fi creators of the world that their artistic decision isn't practical*. (exception being the Anime genre, which I have previously pointed out)

Well, the reason I refuse to engage you on this 'fiction argument' is because it can lead to no where. If you want to argue real life ships, then do so on another (non-EVE) forum, if you want to argue SW physics then as long as you stay within Lucasarts fictional canon of laws then we can discuss that, but it is a fallacy to make arguments that span fictional universes and/or reality to justify propositions in others.

(and besides your reality argument doesn't even hold water in the SW universe. ISDs and SW capital ships all have proportionally small turrets and they do in fact shoot each other to pieces, as anybody who has seen any SW movies can attest to.)

EDIT
* And who are you to decide what is 'practical'? This is science fiction, not science fact.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only