How do you think manned turrets should operate?

[IMMentat]

Ok I have been thinking of tanks in PS2 as well as multi-gun vehicles and am curious as to other peroples thoughts.

An explanation.

Slaved guns.
When real tanks turn and any items on the tank also turns at the same rate. meaning the driver can change the direction a gun is facing by turning the tank/vehicle. This can result in accelerated turret turn-speeds in clutch situations as well as more difficult aiming over rough terrain.

Gyroscopic mounting.
Some modern turrets can stay looking at a specific point regardless of if the tank turns or not, this provides a better platform for aiming but means the driver gets no ability to help a second gun to modify their aim.

In planetside I remember frequenbly using terrain (hills, walls, rocks) while driving a magrider to let my gunner get greater vertical elevation in order to quickly aim and shoot at aircraft almost directly overhead, Slaved guns would force the gun to rotate exactly as the tank did (allowing rapid airborne shots), but gyroscopic turrets would be slower at this type of manoevering.

Personally speaking I'm unsure if I prefer driver-turrets to be on a gyroscope or not, the original lightning is a good example of a slaved turret and it made judging the turnspeed of the tank easier, but meant you were constantly adjusting your aim while turning a vehicle in order to drive down a road one way while laying down fire in another direction (a difficult task at the best of times).

Anyone have an opinions as to if they would prefer to gun a vehicle with or without gyroscopic turrets?

[Xyntech]

I would tend to lean towards gyroscope for all. I can see some value in having the main driver controlled gun turn as the tank turns, but in general I think it feels better to just turn the tank while keeping your view (and turret) pointing in the same direction as before. Rotate your view (turret) to match your tanks direction if you want to keep looking ahead. It looks a little strange sometimes with the gun bobbing around as the tank turns, but it makes for better gameplay I think.

Either way, the gunners should certainly always by on a gyroscope. That's just annoying if your gun is rotating in ways that you can't control. This applies to the main gun as well if and when it is released to the gunner with a dedicated gunner variant.

[Fuse]

While I think they should move completely independently and be stabilized, I feel that I should point out that you can stabilize the gun vertically and still have it slaved to the tank's rotation. The main point of a stabilized gun is to keep the elevation steady as you traverse uneven terrain, otherwise your shot would fall short or go long.

For people unfamiliar with the concept, a quick google pulled this up. https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/...pdf?sequence=4 (PDF)

EDIT: Day late, but I noticed I wrote horizontal instead of vertical.

[Immigrant]

I voted second option. IMO most turrets should be on gyro however I think it will be easier to focus on driving and easier to aim if main turret was slaved. However I doubt I will drive a tank and thus those who plan on doing it should say what works best for them.

[IMMentat]

Nice find there Fuse, and a good observation.

P.S.
This also counts towards any turrets on any vehicle (Including aircraft like the Liberator and galaxy), so unless you intend never drive any weaponised vehicle then there should be some relevance for all.

[Gelnika]

There are advantages to both, though i'd say a gyroscope-stabilized turret would make the secondary gunner's job much easier rather than having to battle the movements of his driver. Additionally, gyroscopic-stabilized turrets were coming into use at the end of the second world war, and this is supposed to be taking place in the far future.

[sylphaen]

Have you ever gunned for a sunderer's ballgun in PS1 ? No gyroscoping will make many seasick in less time than it takes to hack a base.

[Mastachief]

i used to drive and gun my own vanguard using 2 pc's and having none gyroscopic main turret provided a challenge,

With the driver now being a gunner i want that challenge to remain, lets not go complete noob.

[Stardouser]

So that I understand this right - are Battlefield tanks slaved?

[Zekeen]

I understand what you're looking at here with some of these ideas. This could make the designated driver/gunner, much more accurate with shooting on the move than a solo driver/gunner. Very good points.

[roguy]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

So that I understand this right - are Battlefield tanks slaved?

In between afaik.

When the tank turned all guns keep pointing in the same direction, if the tank became angled going over a bump the guns kept they direction in relation to the tank itself (meaning you'd be looking at the sky, completely messing up your aim).

[Pyreal]

Gyro.

This is the future, they got that crap sorted out. I'm sure the V.S. fixed it and the two bickering monkeys thieved the technology.

[Brusi]

um, can we have a toggle?

[Haro]

I prefer having turret control independent of movement, for the most part, for drivers and secondary gunners. I like the added precision, and I think you can get a better feel for turning through mini-maps or other hud indicators rather than a slaved turret system.

[kaffis]

Slaving the driver's gun would help provide an incentive to sidegrade to dedicated driving (at which point both guns, belonging now to two gunners, would be gyroscoped). As such, I support it.