Big fuel tanks blocking guns is a huge turnoff

[Vincefeld]

I suggest developer changing fuel tank height so gun elevated once can shoot over it.
Maybe someone in community knows a way to tweak parts in configs to change their height if developer refuses to do so?
Big ships already impractical and hard to build without this hurdle...

[Vangheist]

Are you experiencing this in the builder with the fire arcs or in test battles? I ask that because there are a lot of ships that I have been using that display blocked angles in the builder that are either far narrower in a battle or are just not blocked. I think the disconnect might have happened when the stricter height/obstruction of 1.16 was changed.

If your problem is in fact still present in test battles, there may be something to be done about part height in the OL.seria file, but I've never tested with editing the stats of individual pieces.

[Vincefeld]

In builder, dont know about test battles. havent tested. Thanks for pointer man.

[dgresevfan]

I'm experimenting with this right now and it seems that even with my "gun mount" hull block elevated TWICE the stupid fuel tank still gets in the way.

Well, in the ship builder going by arcs anyway.

I read somewhere the game only has three z levels so it seems the tank would always block the guns.

Maybe I should just put multiple small tanks somewhere...

[Vincefeld]

Originally posted by dgresevfan:

I'm experimenting with this right now and it seems that even with my "gun mount" hull block elevated TWICE the stupid fuel tank still gets in the way...

I just tested it and had to lift gun mount THRICE for it to shoot over tanks.
This is simply ridiculous and unpractical. In what state of mind you need to be to decide this is okay and release it?

[Bers]

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2934154829
Even though the arcs are turned off now, but even after they are turned on, the restrictions are easily bypassed if you show a little imagination

[Vincefeld]

Originally posted by Bers:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2934154829
Even though the arcs are turned off now, but even after they are turned on, the restrictions are easily bypassed if you show a little imagination

yeah if you want to build something suboptimal, i struggle even wtih well built ship due to my accuracy

[Vangheist]

Originally posted by Vincefeld:

yeah if you want to build something suboptimal, i struggle even wtih well built ship due to my accuracy

First I'll highly recommend turning on the longest crosshair style if you haven't and second I'll just say you can buy your way around having to aim properly in a pinch.

As for 'suboptimal' I think it really depends on the conditions of the game. When 1.16 first dropped with the more restrictive arcs I was a little upset and confused that so many ships had much worse capabilities than before, but realized the same thing applied to enemy ships as well. Borey and Griffin could hardly keep more than 2 guns on target especially if you positioned well. If you had a ship that was designed to fire all its guns when it was sitting in their blind spot that would be the new 'optimal' I think. Of course it would still need to be fuel efficient which is more difficult now as well.

[Vincefeld]

Originally posted by ArchonWulf:

Originally posted by Vincefeld:

yeah if you want to build something suboptimal, i struggle even wtih well built ship due to my accuracy

When 1.16 first dropped with the more restrictive arcs I was a little upset and confused that so many ships had much worse capabilities than before, but realized the same thing applied to enemy ships as well. Borey and Griffin could hardly keep more than 2 guns on target especially if you positioned well. Of course it would still need to be fuel efficient which is more difficult now as well.

Thats a good point mate, hard to argue that enemy ships got even more affected than player. But this is still laziness on gamedev part... Changing building rules and not adapting vanilla ships to them, making game easier than it should. Feels like a oversight/bug tbh.

As for nightmarish fuel efficiency... I just gave up and took all guns and armor off Sevastopol and use it like a mule to carry fuel. in 1.16 design became pointless

Edit: I like my 37mm subcaliber being able to 360 around ship to defend me against missiles and proxifuse, but with yellow fuel tanks you have to place like twice as many on both sides

[Bers]

Originally posted by Vincefeld:

Thats a good point mate, hard to argue that enemy ships got even more affected than player. But this is still laziness on gamedev part... Changing building rules and not adapting vanilla ships to them, making game easier than it should. Feels like a oversight/bug tbh.

As for nightmarish fuel efficiency... I just gave up and took all guns and armor off Sevastopol and use it like a mule to carry fuel. in 1.16 design became pointless

If you want the bots to have good ships for the 1.16 patch
https://www.nexusmods.com/highfleet/mods/21
The design of the ships has not gone away, we just need to think more. I myself swore at the developer when he made the 1.16 patch, but then I got used to it and make cool ships.

[AtomHeartDragon]

Last time I checked the functionality was broken in non-beta branch?
It shows in editor but does nothing.

[Vangheist]

Originally posted by AtomHeartDragon:

Last time I checked the functionality was broken in non-beta branch?
It shows in editor but does nothing.

Yea that's what I've been thinking. Are the arcs still like 1.160 in the experimental branch?

[AtomHeartDragon]

Originally posted by ArchonWulf:

Originally posted by AtomHeartDragon:

Last time I checked the functionality was broken in non-beta branch?
It shows in editor but does nothing.

Yea that's what I've been thinking. Are the arcs still like 1.160 in the experimental branch?

They are, but glitch settings aren't so it ♥♥♥♥♥ some of the (Win7?) players since the newly restored glitch effects seem to work worse than the original ones, at least on some machines, unless they tone the GFX settings down a lot (to "no clouds").

So lose/lose.