Captial ship's turrets are dirty cheaters
I was doing some Practice Mode on a stardestroyer, and as an experiment, I decided to destroy every gun and missile turret on it, rather than trying to finish it off. I wanted to see if it was possib...
Forum Discussion
Indeed true. But that's a different thing than what I'm talking about. Your thing is documented in-game, in the loading screen tips text blurbs IIRC, and in the in-game audio snippets you get from your fleet commander. Also they even increased this effect in the 2.0 release, and documented it in the release notes: https://www.ea.com/games/starwars/squadrons/news/update-2-0-release-notes - "Flagship turrets are now more aggressive when being attacked out of phase."
My thing in the OP is about when one is attacking a capital ship in offense mode, in-phase.
@MunkieBrainsOld right. Ok so you know. I also noticed the strange firings from strang places and the generators dont explode. It is a thing. I tried to do exactly that before and im sure I didnt get as far as you, but did see all it and there seems also to maybe be invisible fire. So, if they give us instant replay, I can really see whats going on. I wish as a sim variant, they could had been more detailed in modeling. Like the flag ships are not quite the right sizes either i think.
The aforementioned invisible turrets might have been a fix to the mosquito-ing technique of the old days. The problem about making lasers being shot out from turrets is that someone will always find a blind spot where no turret can reach (aka. mosquito-ing). Imagine if a Bomber parks in between the 2 shield generators on top the bridge. I think none of the turrets can reach it. Another place is the hangar - it's recessed and a Bomber can park there to spawn camp and also be hidden from turrets.
So the 'lasers from nowhere' thing is to ensure that no starfighter is safe from being shot no matter where it is.
@Metric-SINISTER Yeah, but dead spots are "realistic" when it comes to canon. If somebody manages to park in a dead spot for the turbolasers/turrets, then they are a sitting duck and it should be easy for starfighters to take care of them.
I'd much rather see that if all the weaponry of a capital ship is destroyed, it can no longer fire on you.
- @Cave_Waverider you see, you can't hope for 'selective' realism. Yes, dead spots are realistic and canon accurate, but how about a Starfighter's ability to stop nearly dead in its tracks like in this game? Is that canon? We don't know because we've never seen Starfighters do that in the movies. So this begs the question of whether the devs wanna make the game completely physics accurate. If so, then where are the forward thrusters to act as a break for starfighters? Where are the side thrusters to enable yaw and pitch movement in space? These are not questions that even the Star Wars canon have answered. The movies take liberties when it comes to physics.
A truely physics accurate space battle shouldn't even involve a shootout between capital ships and starfighters. They have hyperspace tech. Where the hell are hyperspace kamikaze ships? In terms of physics, you can ram a Corellian Corvette at the speed of light into the Star Destroyer's bridge and obliterate it completely. So the most cost effective way to handle a space battle is to have a fleet of Corvettes all accelerating at hyperspace into large capital ships.
The point being, its best to not get into 'realism',
