Since "AGT" is short for Automated Gatling Turret, it would seem logical to restrict it to the new Turret ports currently on the Atlases and Moths.

Besides the fact that the current Turret line-up could use some variety (<understatement>), the Gatling Cannon has been collecting dust in the AGT's shadow for years. A change up might do the game some good.

Nothing short of fixing the gatling cannon will fix the gatling cannon. Please never mention this weapon again. Thanks.

Sure, just as soon as the Prom's L-port gets turned into the turret port that the backstory says it is. Though this wouldn't do such great things for the Eckataur.

I agree with Lecter, the Prom's L-port SHOULD be a turret port (I mean, it even has that pretty picture of a turret ON the model)

I've hated the AGT for a long time, it's a boring weapon which DOES help out heavier ships, but gives, imo, a crutch to people who can't aim. Every ship with a large port has to be balanced to the possibility that someone will equip an AGT, and so, rather than making heavy ships better, it has the balancing effect of making every ship with a large port worse.

Let's remove the crutch.

Indeed...imagine the possibilities for an L port Valk variant, if one didn't have to worry about what an AGT-Valk would do.

Swarms valk!!! ahhhh

Eh, whatever. There's an ammo limitation on that. But a single L-port X-1 valk would be a fantastic mega posi platform.

I completely agree with this suggestion (except for the swarm valk bit). A turret port instead of a large port on a prom with this bit implemented would be damn cool, too. Now we can get two kills for killing AGT users! If that is turned into a turret port, though, then it would probably make sense to turn the two side ports into heavy ports to maintain its reputation as a heavy bomber/tank. Also, if a prom pilot didn't have a buddy, then it would be pretty pathetic to see them with the firepower of a light fighter, especially considering the possibility of seeing more and more heavy ports on ship since we would no longer need to hold back on them with the existence of this weapon in mind.

Um, I don't think you quite understand what I (and I assume Shape) is saying about the Prom. Turret on prom != require a second player to operate. To do that would be to basically deprive the Serco side of an effective top-line combat rig.

Perhaps a better approach would be for there to be a third set of Itani/Serco/UIT ships introduced: the multi-player combat rig.

This is a great suggestion for two reasons:

1. It puts a sorely needed useful weapon in the turret port. No one can hit crap with a Nuet on a turret and I haven't seen ANYONE use a shield turret since the 3 trigger was removed.

2. It's going to force people to try other ships that an AGT hog!

I would add that the prom should be switched to a turret port, that we should get a Centaur variant with a turret port instead of one of the Lports, and we need MORE MORE MORE turret weapons! USEABLE gunships would add so much to the game, teamwork wise and event wise, even trade wise. If traders had AGTs in their turret ports they might fly multiple players in a ship.

FURTHER: There should be options for turrets on ships to be AI controlled.

FINALLY: I would like to add that along with the influx of awesome turret weapons (I suggest turreted rail guns, turreted AGT, and some kind of long range fletchette ala BSG's fighter screen) we need a new ship class: GUNSHIPS. Large pre cap ship size ships (read: still dockable) around or slightly larger than the Moths with increased armor and L and S missile ports as well as the turrets. IMAGINE the gameplay possibilities! Escorts gunships for trader ships and convoys, gunship based battles and blockade running. And doable without the need to be able to dock a cap ship!

Just to be clear, the proposal seems to be:

Make the AGT only usable on Turrets. It could not longer be equipped to standard Large ports, for single-player usage.

There's lots of other stuff in here about the Prom, automated turrets, blah blah.. that should all have its own thread. For the moment, I'm responding only to the above suggestion.

I have nothing against making the AGT into a turret-only weapon (although I'm sure I'll bear the brunt of a lot of bitching, if I do). However, the turret's grid-power requirements will need to be (much as they are currently) that only one AGT may be equipped as a turret on any given ship. Ie, no 3-AGT behemoths. Here's why:

Each bullet the AGT shoots is unique. As a result, it spams a considerable amount of network traffic. The bullets are unchanging vectors in space, which can be predicted (pretty much) perfectly by both sides without further communication, but the sheer number of object adds is considerable. Allowing for 3 to be equipped on the Behemoth would be enough to potentially cause "lag" stalls for some players if nearby.

Some of you may remember the initial capships had AGTs on their turrets. But it was so network spammy I had to nerf them all to silly neut-type stuff, and then eventually invent the current single-shot high-speed Gauss-like cap weapon. This was entirely for network traffic and load reasons. There are still a few on the Teradon, but I changed their firing rates and other parameters.

It's technically possible for us to create a more intelligent "AGT" that fires predictive "blocks" of shots, instead of individual shots, reducing the rate of network adds to maybe 1/5th or less, but doing so would.. well, take time and a fair amount of testing, for a non-critical game addition.

So, as long as only a single AGT can appear on any of these ships, I'm ok with it at present. More feedback and discussion is warranted.

That doesn't seem to be a problem on the Convoy Moth Heavies. They all have more than one AGT. Although I have a fast and very low latency to VO so maybe my experiences isn't typical.

Still, limiting to 1 AGT is reasonable as well.

If the gats firing pattern is non random say 32 positions (barrels) and the fire rate is constant then you do not need to send each shot. You only need to send a begin/end fire message and the current "barrel" position along with the direction the weapon is facing. The autotracking can be also be handled by the server as easily once the current position of the turrent is known. Still a high server load but perhaps more mangeable?

<shrug>

Three gunners in VO is such a rare occurance I am not sure the lag factor would be unbearable. Even so I agree the agt should become a turrent only weapon. Perhaps the other two ports on the moth could become regular L ports instead? or better yet make the side ports both turrents and the rear an L port.

We quantize orientations to reduce packet size, and as a result, using the orientation to get a given trajectory would be not-very-good. Even aside from this, using "start" and "stop" times along with a barrel angle tends to be considerably less accurate, when network latency, packet loss and retransmission enters the picture. It's not impossible to do that, and it would probably work ok if we weren't a "twitch" combat model game where every player is likely to notice the smallest inaccuracies ("I shouldn't have gotten hit there!").

Anyway, this is really getting into more of a game architecture discussion, where, yes, we don't put a lot of pressure on the server. And that's the only reason why we can have things like capship battles. Otherwise, a couple of you guys getting into furballs would basically load down a single sector.

I'm not sure the Prom needs a separate thread, Inc.

My only point was that the Prom should remain a single player ship that's capable of equipping an AGT just as it is now. Period. To do otherwise is to gut the Prom's combat capabilities while leaving the Valk alone.

yes finally make the agt just a turret this will be a mile stone in vo combat

Special cases are not well-loved in software development. We have a "generic" Large Port system, and a "generic" Turret Port system. If we move the AGT from Large to Turret, then it won't be equippable on the prom. (even if we add a turret port to the prom, it won't be like it is. AI control still won't be pilot control, and I don't want pilot-controlled "turrets").

We can limit what can be equipped where, to some extent, with grid power.. but I have no immediate means of making a special grid-power situation for the prom. Powercells are also generic.

I don't want to unfairly nerf the prom, but I'm leery of either A) weird special-casing scenarios, or B) requiring AI-controlled turrets for fighters.. which may be pretty involved development-wise (regardless of how "simple" it might seem on the outside).

So, I welcome more feedback on this whole AGT/Turret/Prom tradeoff.

What about making a turret version of the AGT, and a second large port version of the AGT that has a high grid requirement? That would allow it to fly on a prom. Perhaps nerf the damage for the Lport version, or the range or the fire rate, etc.

Oh come on. If you can't make 2 light and 1 heavy slot hurt without the AGT in a ship that has as much strafing power as the prom, there are other issues and it isn't the ship.

While I'm not a big fan of the AGT, it would cause people to drastically rethink how they fly heavy ships down to the warthog.

Flare/AGT is a very popular combo.

At the upper end of PvP, I don't think it would change much. For people entering into PvP, it would remove a roadblock to their skill development (AGT is a big crutch as was already mentioned). The people who would have the hardest time are those flying Taurs (does anyone bother with putting AGT on a rag?).

I don't think think it should matter to a prom user who can competently handle the ship.

honestly the prom has enough armor that not having an agt isn't going to kill it. its really more the duel flares that do all the damage and allow the agt to get in a bunch of hits while you are disorientated which is the main problem with it. and its super spam ability.

just make it a turret only weapon and people will adapt or die