Capitol rail cannon turrets were nerfed from 180degrees to 160 because they were too “op”.

A swarm rag can do 119,300 in a single run and have auto tracking. When reloading off a capship lets assume worst case timing of two runs per minute. Thats 238,600 per minute with auto tracking.

4 caprails with the 10 second delay do 240,000 per minute assuming you can land all 4 on a target as there is no autoaim. (Way more skill required)
I would argue that 180 railguns are not op and require more skill to use than auto tracking missiles. I would request that raill cannon turrets be placed back to 180 in light of these numbers.

A swarm rag doesn't move at 400m/s.

In all honesty unless you have tried using 4 caprails on a dent at a moving target you really cant make a counter argument, you can only assume and guess.

I'm with wash on this one. It's an exceedingly tough accomplishment to hit targets in that fashion at anything other then VERY close distance.

I guess it is tough to land them if you are using turret bots.

Caprails are pretty easy to use, the ragnarok has a large profile, and it's a slow ship. A trident turboing away could easily kill a bomber.

They are mostly a defensive weapon and used to kill chasers(in a fighter). You are doing something wrong if you are sitting still or chasing fighters with a quad rail dent.

Raw DPS is not a valid argument, you are comparing a shielded trident to a fighter.

-100000

1) caprails do have autoaim

2) what niki said

3) comparing rails to swarms makes no sense whatsoever, and comparing capital rails to a swarm rag makes even less sense. They are totally different weapons. Rails weren't nerfed because of their DPS alone.

Maybe you forgot this information:

https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/1/35585?page=1

+1

Caprail autoaim is terrible. Stationary objects a mere 800m away cannot be hit unless slightly moving the capship the caprails are on. and even then only by flicking autoaim on/off.

I'm with Wash on this. 180 degree caprails are not OP. In fact, it seems a logical thing since the turret supposedly sits in a protruding turret on the ship.

If you have caprails with auto aim you are clearly modifying the game outside of what all other vo users have access to. Please show your work via screenshot.

DPS is a valid reason.

A forward facing assault weapon is needed with the amount of capitolships flying about, the more aggressive npc ai code and the current incorrect phantom wins happening in Deneb.

Denying capitol combat at this point simply says to gamers who seek the next level of the game evolution that they are not important and that the effort to build a capitol ship is simply so they can move more widgets at a single time. Two years on since the nerf and capitol combat in inc vision is as mythical as the type S & P tridents. 180 rail guns makes this a possible reality now with minimal effort.

So you are basically asking for the ability to drop shields of another capship (and then continue attacking it) with your trident using caprails and 4 LUA plugin-linked "helper" accounts. You should start your suggestion with the problem you are trying to address, instead of some bizarre comparison.

I think everyone agrees that making capships assault-worthy is a good idea. But it's not a good idea to give it just to those tiny amount of players who have the ability to use 5 accounts at once with a 3rd party turret shooting plugin for very obvious reasons.

I always thought the role of this gun would be a good anti trident/capship weapon my self. It can hit fighters at close range though and that's perfectly fine.

Greenwall,Arkyo, and Niki speak valid points.

This topic has already been talked about and we should just wait for new capships/turrets/NPC gunners to be released. Then we can talk about balance.

"I think everyone agrees that making capships assault-worthy is a good idea. But it's not a good idea to give it just to those tiny amount of players who have the ability to use 5 accounts at once with a 3rd party turret shooting plugin for very obvious reasons."

Third party plugins, are NOT necessary to do this. They certainly help, but it can be done completely manually. I've done it, and it isn't actually very hard. It does however require more hardware. Trying to mitigate the utility of extra computer hardware is probably a fools errand.

Ultimately the best solution is some kind of 'tactical mode' similar to say world of warships, only the turrets that can bear on the target fire. Another option is to add more forward facing weapons mounts. Take it up to maybe 2 large ports and 2 small ports. That might be over powered or not. It'd have to be tested to find out for certain.

Edit: Oh yea, maybe this would help too. https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/36726

I'm not against Capitol combat but the OP is about offense against ragnaroks, which isn't really about Capitol combat. They are already heavily at a disadvantage (IMO) against tridents.

I'm really confused why people seem to think they have bad autoaim, I have killed a lot of chasers with it. Unless you are going forwards/backwards, they are going to be tough to aim with.

As an assault weapon against other Capitol ships, my only issues with it are:

• It would make the weapon too OP against small fighters.
• As Wally said, people without turret bots would be at a disadvantage.

If the caprail were nerfed further, it would only make the Goliath a bit weaker. I feel the 160 arc nerf was fair.

Adding to what LNH said, we could have some fixed forward facing turret ports, instead of the single large port. You could use caprails/capgauss as an assault weapon against other Capitol ships, but be ineffective against fighters around you. This would not be replacing the current ports, but would be additional ports. You would still be able to place capswarms on the other turrets and defend against fighters.

+1

The original post was comparing DPS to show that the DPS of rail cannons ( which do not have auto aim ) vs a Rag the primary attack ship against capitol ships.

Guess what? You dont need 5 accounts to do this. You can do it with 4 friends or guildmates and it is way more effective. If you choose not to do this or dont have the means to run 5 accounts at once that is irrelevant to the discussion. People are not prohibited from using more than a mouse and keyboard to play, so why should the ability to run multiple accounts in anyway be a factor in the discussion. It shouldn’t.

so why should the ability to run multiple accounts in anyway be a factor in the discussion. It shouldn’t.

It should because the change you are suggesting heavily benefits the solo player / 5 account situation more than anything else. It's much MUCH easier for you to coordinate with your 5 selves than it is for you to coordinate with 4 friends.

Advocating to empower a select group of single individuals to more easily wield greater combat capabilities when the intention (in current gameplay) clearly is for that power to be shared amongst groups of people (with swarm rags, pcbs, and the rest) is just silly. How is that better for the game over all?

It's much MUCH easier for you to coordinate with your 5 selves than it is for you to coordinate with 4 friends.

With voice chat it is very easy to coordinate with four friends. I believe voice chat is built into the game.

Aryko I was actually talking about just regular weapons ports, not turrets. I ain't got anything against turrets specifically.

Part of what is needed is better anti-capitol ship weapons for light bombers like the Ragnerok. They should come with major drawbacks. I think that a solo pilot killing a trident SHOULD be a difficult task, both as a challenge for the rag pilot and as a reward for all the hard work that goes into trident production. Trying to make capitol ships balanced with fighters one for one I think is a bad idea.

As far as I can see, the primary advantage given by the changes wash is suggesting, is really that they could be again used as an anti capitol ship assault weapon.

The added defense against rag bombers is probably negligible, as it is trivial for him to simply roll or turn a trident enough to bring one or two guns to bear on an approaching bomber even with the current 160 limitation.

What we really need is generally better anti capitol ship weaponry. Maybe a Cap Gauss MK2, Same as the original, but 50% higher damage, and DPS, but lower velocity, 140m/s sounds reasonable. Sure it could swat fighters down if they get in VERY close, 150 meters or so, but I can't think of why a fighter would need to get that close to land shots on something as big and slow as a trident or goliath.

LNH, I was just adding to your suggestion of more ports. A few additional turret ports that are "fixed" and forward facing could act as a very strong anti capitol setup, by placing a rail gun or a capital gauss on them. These would probably out damage a few Large or small port weapons, and could be a better alternative to adding more large ports.

I agree with the need for better anti capitol weaponry for Capital ships. If the arc buff indeed doesn't have any meaningful effect on fighters, it seems fair barring the turret bot usage. If not, an option for better anti capital weaponry should be explored.

@we all float, you are missing the point

You can't coordinate with 4 friends anywhere if you don't have 4 friends online.

You can't coordinate with 4 friends anywhere if you don't have 4 friends online.

Just hire 4 noobs online. The galaxy is hopping with players these days. It is the most active I have seen it in about 3 years or so.