Turret Rotation Lock - Reduce Gunners Required

[Morbo513]

Simply enough, I suggest that placing a turret on a rotation lock reduce the number of gunners required to man it by one.

 

Logic:

Presumably, the gunnery crew of each turret has one person aiming, the other(s) monitoring/maintaining/loading etc. With the turret fixed in place, the aiming part is up to whoever's flying, because wherever the ship's pointing, the turret is.

 

That's by no means the most compelling reason I make this suggestion though:

Fixed forwards weapons are a disadvantage, especially if they have the independent targeting trait. For one, it means you're almost always going to be facing front and travelling directly towards the enemy when engaging, which results in a more linear damage pattern and guaranteed windows of opportunity to get accurate shots off (due to not having to lead).

Generally, the game design as it currently stands discourages small, fast and nimble ships, where fixed-forwards weapons make the most sense. Due to crew constraints, it can often be difficult to achieve reasonable firepower against the sacrifices to other systems and stats you need for speed and maneuverability. This would put it on the level in my opinion.

[Uthael]

By that logic, auto-aim independent targeting weapons should also require 1 less crew member (doesn't stack with your suggestion).

 

Makes sense. Doesn't make a big balance difference. I like the suggestion.

 

[Edited for clarification]

[Morbo513]

By that logic, auto-aim weapons should also require 1 less crew member (doesn't stack with your suggestion).

Is auto-aim its own distinct thing from independent targeting? Regardless, if fixed forward, a turret is no longer a turret. I'm sure I made a similar suggestion before, but something I'd really like to see is a block that you "imbue" with a turret, the number you can depending on volume vs turret size. Larger X/Y scale would add more barrels in the same fashion as thruster ports, but Z would let you have multiple weapons firing out the same "cluster".

This is what I've been doing

 

Makes sense. Doesn't make a big balance difference. I like it.

I'm not sure if you're referring to the suggestion, or the current state of things