[Dragon]

Main beam sounds like a ship's best beam. A Cain's little beam would be it's main beam. So I think it's a bad idea. You couldn't just call all such beams main beams because some ships have different types on them.

Note, "main beam" would be reserved for "unclassified" main beams. Meaning, in reality, Miolnir beams and Sathanas BFReds. In the former case, it's a bit irrelevant, since there's only one turret on Miolnir anyway. In case of Sath, I think that it'll help during Bearbaiting and High Noon, since the beams in this case are clearly mains, and that'd make them distinct from Sath's "stinger" LRed.

[General Battuta]

What we're using for BP is 'beam cannon' for either light beams (cruisers) or secondary beams (Orion's slashers) and 'main beam' for beams that are both large and clearly the centerpiece of a warship's arsenal. So the Ravana's LReds would be 'main beam' and its SReds would be 'beam cannon'.

[Phantom Hoover]

Yeah, those are good names, except 'plasma turret' should probably stay 'laser turret', 'pulse' is BP only, and ASM/AAM are too technical - best to stick with 'missile launcher' for the MVPs.

torpedo vs. missile launcher seems pretty obvious and unambiguous

[General Battuta]

Yeah, but no retail ship has a 'torpedo launcher' - the closest you get is fusion mortars.

[Lorric]

What we're using for BP is 'beam cannon' for either light beams (cruisers) or secondary beams (Orion's slashers) and 'main beam' for beams that are both large and clearly the centerpiece of a warship's arsenal. So the Ravana's LReds would be 'main beam' and its SReds would be 'beam cannon'.

Well I guess that would work. I prefer them all to be distinct, but it would keep it simple.

What would you do with the Sathanas secondary beam then? Would that be a beam cannon?

[Ulala]

This seems like a re-imagining of the retail turret names and probably doesn't belong in the mvps


/s

[Dragon]

What we're using for BP is 'beam cannon' for either light beams (cruisers) or secondary beams (Orion's slashers) and 'main beam' for beams that are both large and clearly the centerpiece of a warship's arsenal. So the Ravana's LReds would be 'main beam' and its SReds would be 'beam cannon'.

Well I guess that would work. I prefer them all to be distinct, but it would keep it simple.

What would you do with the Sathanas secondary beam then? Would that be a beam cannon?

Yes. The BP system seems reasonable enough. Oh, and did you notice that the question of "more specific turret names" has boiled down to "rename main beams and AAAs"? The retail system wasn't that bad, it turns out.

[yuezhi]

I once asked about something similar
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=79904.msg1583078#msg1583078

[Lorric]

Oh, and did you notice that the question of "more specific turret names" has boiled down to "rename main beams and AAAs"? The retail system wasn't that bad, it turns out.

I would actually have been surprised if the other turrets had come under discussion.

[SypheDMar]

What we're using for BP is 'beam cannon' for either light beams (cruisers) or secondary beams (Orion's slashers) and 'main beam' for beams that are both large and clearly the centerpiece of a warship's arsenal. So the Ravana's LReds would be 'main beam' and its SReds would be 'beam cannon'.

Well I guess that would work. I prefer them all to be distinct, but it would keep it simple.

What would you do with the Sathanas secondary beam then? Would that be a beam cannon?

I'd prefer it to be even less distinct. All cap beams should be 'beam cannon' and anti-fighter beams should be 'anti-fighter beam' or 'AAA beam' if the former is too long. I think my idea is more consistent. I believe that it is better to adopt a conservative approach in order to be more neutral.

On second thought, I take back what I said since my idea would do very little to making turret targeting more intuitive.

[Nyctaeus]

Shadow Genesis has this system from the first release and AFAIK I think we were first . We have Main Beam for the biggest cannons, Prim. Beam [Primary Beam] for other heavy beams, but not main, like triple Boreas' spinal beams, and Sec. Beam [Secondary Beam] for secondary ones. Anti-air weapons are divided into many other categories. The problem with this is custom turret setup, like in The Game of TAG. Where the Warspite has 2 AAAh or something else, this turrets will remain as "Main Beam"s even after we change the weapon in FRED, so it deprive us very important balancing tool. While I personaly find it ridiculous [imagine Hecate with her big beam dishes equipped with SGreen for example], many FREDers use this. Proper made system may require attention of some coders.

[General Battuta]

Nope, a lot of mods have used it - it really doesn't matter who was first. This topic is just about extending the system to the MVPs.

That system's pretty good, but you missed something important:

The problem with this is custom turret setup, like in The Game of TAG. Where the Warspite has 2 AAAh or something else, this turrets will remain as "Main Beam"s even after we change the weapon in FRED, so it deprive us very important balancing tool. While I personaly find it ridiculous [imagine Hecate with her big beam dishes equipped with SGreen for example], many FREDers use this. Proper made system may require attention of some coders.

This isn't an issue at all. Any time you alter a turret's loadout in FRED, just change the turret's name with the change-subsystem-name SEXP.

[Droid803]

So as long as someone is willing to go through the retail FS2 campaign and insert these change-subsystem-name SEXPs as appropriate, sounds kewl!

[General Battuta]

Right, but it's a lot more efficient to just do that in the MVP tables.

[Rodo]

This is possible? please MVP go ahead!

[General Battuta]

I just realized what Droid was saying and lol yes, obviously I should have just agreed: that is a necessary step.

[Kolgena]

I always thought this was an engine limitation.

+1 for changing. No longer will I wonder if a turret I'm trying to treb is an LRed or an AAA.