csaba wrote:X games always had both options.
Based on XR player weapons already do enough damage gimballed. Nerfing damage on tracking guns would lengthen the PVE experience for most people, potentially making it boring. No one wants that.
Balancing them in an SP game is a waste of resources.
You have V crushers and Meteorites and whatever dumbfire missiles will be in X4. Both technically 1 hit fighters but hard to use/not meant against them. Anything larger that can withstand a barrage is slow as a whale anyway.
Actually balance in a single player game is also quite important. Not as critical as a PVP game, of course, but still important. We should have options that rewards skill, and tactics.
If we have auto-targetted weapons that are really good, and do as much damage as a fixed weapon... Then who would use the fixed weapon? Also, what about the player that is really good at space games, and wants to push the limits of the game? If they have options, it would make the game better for them. Weapons would not have to be 100% balanced, but providing some difference for players that can reward skill/meta gaming is a good thing.
We should have the option for skilled players to get into an M5 with fixed weapons and glass-cannon configs kill an M0 solo... Just because... That would be great for the player base in general.
The main difference in ship to ship combat between ED, SC and the X games that in X you usually fight groups of enemies 5-6 usually at a time up to 20-100 drones at tops while in the other 2 mentioned games 98% of the fights are 1on1s. If we reduce the damage on auto targeting weapons that kill enemies under a second like the inertial hammer, the plasma cannon and the MK3 repeater in Rebirth we will lengthen the battles to oblivion while also increasing the difficulty quite a bit since the AI also autotargets and your shield stops recharging in combat. This leads to frustration and a lot of upset people.
Giving hard hitting fixed weapons to AI is also a nightmare for balance since they pretty much either auto hit with them or miss all the time. Check out what happened with ED about 1,5 years ago when the AI combat was "tweaked", people quit the game over it.
I don't understand your M0 argument. It's already easier to dodge the M0's projectiles than to go for the gazillion surface elements on it and since shields don't recharge anymore the hardest part is to keep strafing for several hours while shooting at a ship the size of a small town. 20% increase in damage will cut the time by half an hour but you will still be shooting at it for days.
Where it actually comes to skill with fixed weapons is only with S maybe faster M sized ships. Where I already pointed out how different is to fight 1 enemy or 5.
That's true, but it also depends on the numbers you give it. I mean, if fixed weapons do 100 damage but you can only hit with then ~20% of the time, then you do 20 damage. If turreted weapons hit for 25 damage, but you hit with them ~80% of the time, you end up with 20 damage... Hum...
Sure, on paper the 100 damage fixed weapons would trump the 25 damage turreted weapons, but in practice, it's very different.
And that's where the skill/tactics would come in. With turret weapons, there is not much to do, they will track and hit (good for low skill players). With fixed weapons, if the player is good, he may be able to hit ~25% of the time, and get a damage boost.
Will that break the game? no. Would it give skilled players something to achieve, and maybe even newbies something to strive for? sure.
It all depends on numbers. Sure, we could bork the numbers, and make the AI hit 100% of the time with fixed weapons breaking the system, but you can also make them hit 20% of the time making the system work. It's all up to the programmer.
I just want options in a game. It is a game after all, and messing up the balance a bit is not too bad either. I would prefer that to having no options, and just a few homogenized totally balanced weapons...