or at least not the best way to solve it.
Yes. Put the "same turret cooldown" flag and watch yourself die by the might of Kaysers.
Learn to read, learn to mod and figure out that simply altering AI profiles will do the same job without having to edit any weapons at all.
Aw, that's not fair. If Marcov's goal were to remove the random delay altogether then it's true, but if it's just for fighter weapons then AI profiles is the wrong way to go.
Or a warship with real, unhobbled AI (see BP2).
Look, Battuta. I'm not taking into consideration mod-based references on my point of argument. Hell, you could mod even the Training Laser and make a cruiser take down 50 hapless fighters in less than a minute if you made its firing rate to 0.001 and damage to 50,000 in the editor. You yourself said that it was useless arguing non-canonical, super lasers since it wouldn't be fun anymore.
As far as I'm concerned AI modding to behave realistically is a whole different kettle of soup. Unless you're really going to argue there's a reason that fighters can't make vertical breaks in FS2?
My canon supercedes V canon because it's betterrrrrrrrrrrr
I'll use this as an excuse to mention that the original purpose of this thread was powerful turret configurations using only stock weapons. That should include stock values for AI settings that modify weapon usage.
No. If the cost of building sentry guns with more gun is greater than the benefit of doing so, then it should not be done. What is the benefit of equipping better weapons? The same number of sentries can defeat more fighters; easily testable in FRED. What is the cost? We have no idea. Is the cost greater than or less than the benefit? We have no idea. Does the GTVA have a good reason to mount fighter-grade weapons on sentry guns? We have no idea, but they didn't do it.
Well, apparently such weapons aren't terribly expensive, as an average fighter has 4..some have 8..not counting other equipment. Some fighters even have advanced jump drives. And nothing of that is too expensive. Think.The cost of a fighter already outstrips that of any sentry gun by a huge margin (shield, missiles, jump drives, pilot training and pay, etc..) We go back to the issue of effectiveness.
FS2 - gameplay wise - already makes little strategic and economic sense because the player is a fighter pilot, and as such, all game balance is skewed in favor of a fighter.
Yep, fighters are more expensive than sentry guns. That says nothing about whether it's more economical to arm sentries with better, more expensive guns or cheaper, less effective ones. Not to mention that if sentry guns were cheaper then you could deploy more of them.
Why do you try to paint what is obviously a gameplay balance decision as fluff?
It is not "obviously" a gameplay balance decision. In fact, I'll bet that the random delay actually screwed up balance, creating some extra work for
. My guess is that it is a visual effect, because all turrets firing in sync doesn't look too good. If it were a balance thing, it would have been easier to adjust the fire wait directly for capship weapons and the AI classes for turreted fighter weapons.
I paint it as fluff because that is how it is in the game, and I have not seen a convincing argument that it should be different in the universe.
Sure, you can try and come up with some (however weak) justification for it,
It's pretty strong. The same weapon should behave the same regardless of where it is mounted (in FreeSpace with sufficient power and the modular guns that you can put on different ships). The gun on an Alastor acts differently, so it's possible that it's a different weapon.
but it's ultimatively pointless.
Anything can be justified in one way or another.
You said there's no "possible sensible reason" for (e.g.) Alastor Subachs to fire slower than fighter Subachs, so I gave one.
EDIT: The Faustus is technicly a warship. It's a civilian cruiser designed, modified for military use. Not heavily armored, but it's stil la cruiser, with a cruiser-sized reactor for guns. Whatever you call it, it's built for "doing science" not killing things.
Military things need to defend themselves.
Even a one of those inflatable speedboats is going ot be armed with a regular machinegun, and not some pea-shooter.
Yes, which is why in FreeSpace they're armed with machineguns (Subachs) instead of howitzers (Terran Turrets or other "big ship" guns).