Martin Levac

Some help if you get your lasers from the turret factory: http://www.avorion.net/forum/index.php/topic,2335.0.html

I tried "turningSpeed" and it works really nice, but if it's too high the twitch problem is made much worse. When the turret twitches, one or two bullets fly off at absurd angles even when "accuracy" is 99.9%. I figure the other parameters should work too, so I won't be reporting on those unless I find one that doesn't work.

I figured out why some parameters didn't work. There's two sets of parameters for turrets, weaponStat and turretStat. weaponStat info page: http://stonelegion.com/Avorion/Documentation/Weapon.html turretStat info page: http://stonelegion.com/Avorion/Documentation/TurretTemplate.html -EDIT- Pages above no longer work. Updated first post with working pages. - EDIT- See example here with default code: {name = "High Capacity Lens", amount = 2, investable = 4, weaponStat = "reach", investFactor = 2.0, } {name = "Laser Modulator", amount = 2, investable = 4, turretStat = "energyIncreasePerSecond", investFactor = -0.2, changeType = StatChanges.Percentage } The above is for lasers. Note "reach" is weaponStat, while "energyIncreasePerSecond" is turretStat. When I tried "turningSpeed", it was "weaponStat" and it didn't work it broke the game: {name = "Aluminium", amount = 7, investable = 10, minimum = 3, weaponStat = "turningSpeed", investFactor = 0.1, changeType = StatChanges.Percentage } I just tried this below with "turretStat", it works, but I didn't test if it actually changes tracking speed so I'll do that and report back: {name = "Aluminium", amount = 7, investable = 10, minimum = 3, turretStat = "turningSpeed", investFactor = 0.1, changeType = StatChanges.Percentage } I believe that the other parameters I tried didn't work for the same reason, so I'll try those with "turretStat" when I get to it and report back.

The fix for decreasing stats is to add "changeType = StatChanges.Percentage" to the stat with the problem. For example, mining lasers have this line for damage: {name = "Laser Compressor", amount = 5, investable = 6, minimum = 1, weaponStat = "damage", } Add "changeType = StatChanges.Percentage" like this: {name = "Laser Compressor", amount = 5, investable = 6, minimum = 1, weaponStat = "damage", changeType = StatChange.Percentage } And it will fix the problem.

No, I meant when there's both torque and linear inertia, and then centripetal force and so forth. If it's just torque, it's much simpler. Not that I actually know the equations, I don't.

-EDIT- TurretTemplate and WeaponTemplate pages from modding wiki http://avorion-modding.wikia.com/wiki/TurretTemplate http://avorion-modding.wikia.com/wiki/Weapon -EDIT- On this page is all the parameters that are used by turretfactory.lua to make turrets: http://stonelegion.com/Avorion/Documentation/TurretTemplate.html There's one called "accuracy". It works fine, but it takes a bit of knowledge of the calculations that are done. For all weapons (except mining and salvaging lasers), the calc is: (True for "ChangeType = StatChanges.Percentage". I'm not sure about "*.Flat", and I don't really care because "*.Percentage" is good enough.) (indicated = the stats shown in the window to the right) 1 point of investable = (indicated / investable) * investFactor new indicated = indicated + ((indicated / investable) * investFactor * indicated * 0.01 * invested points) So, for example: Indicated = 80 investable = 6 investFactor = 0.5 1 point of investable = (80 / 6) * 0.5 = 6.66_% This means for each point invested, indicated will change by 6.66_% of itself. In this case, for 1 point invested, indicated would now be: new indicated = 80 + ((80 / 6) * 0.5 * 80 * 0.01 * 1) new indicated = 85.33_ (rounded to 85.3) I used "accuracy" for all appropriate weapons like this: {name = "Steel", amount = 5, investable = 100, minimum = 3, weaponStat = "accuracy", investFactor = 0.1, changeType = StatChanges.Percentage} The above gives us approximately 0.1% indicated per invested point, because usually accuracy is around 95% more or less. === For mining and salvaging lasers, the calc is different. (True for "ChangeType = StatChanges.Percentage") 1 point of investable = indicated * investFactor * 0.1 new indicated = indicated + (indicated * investFactor * 0.1 * invested points) Example modified code: {name = "High Capacity Lens", amount = 2, investable = 10, minimum = 0, weaponStat = "reach", investFactor = 25.0, changeType = StatChanges.Percentage} The above gives us, for a common rarity mining laser with a stock 0.75km range, if we invest all 10 points: new indicated = 0.75 + (0.75 * 25 * 0.1 * 10) new indicated = 19.5km range If instead we use "changeType = StatChanges.Flat" (which is default when it's not explicit for mining and salvaging lasers), the calc is: 1 point of investable = (indicated * investFactor) / investable new indicated = indicated + (((indicated * investFactor) / investable) * invested points) Default code: {name = "High Capacity Lens", amount = 2, investable = 6, minimum = 0, weaponStat = "reach", investFactor = 2.0,} The above gives us, for a common mining laser with a stock range of 0.75km, if we invest all 6 points: new indicated = 0.75 + (((0.75 * 2) / 6) * 6) new indicated = 2.25km range === I tried to use several other variables, none have worked for me but I don't know why. "heat" and everything related to heat or cooling doesn't work. "turningSpeed" doesn't work, but oh how I wish I could make it work. "tech" and everything related to tech doesn't work. "size" doesn't work. Didn't try the others like energy consumption stuff so I can't say if they work. Didn't fool around with "rarityFactor", or "*.toNextLevel" or any other stuff in that file, I'm not that knowledgeable.

Yeah I was thinking about the inertia interaction between turrets and the ship. It gets real complicated when turrets have linear inertia. When the ship turns, it exerts force in a linear fashion on the turrets (never mind that this linear motion becomes circular motion when the turret is attached away from the center of mass of the ship so we'd have to deal with centripetal force and such), this would have to be calculated. But the solution is simple, ignore linear inertia and only do spin inertia (a better word for this is torque, and good models for this can be found in racing games) for the turrets (more appropriately the guns, or if we want to be fancy the gun mount and the rotating platform as well, but if it's just the guns it's enough to give the illusion of full inertia model as the gun mount and the platform would have to work against the gun's inertia appropriately) themselves. This would be the same as bits of wreckage flying away instantly at infinite velocity, but they would still obey spin inertia so they would only accelerate and spin accordingly. But since turrets are attached to the ship, they can't fly away, they follow the ship's linear motion.

All objects in the game have inertia and invisible brake thrusters. Asteroids, ships, bits of wreckage, all of it. The biggest impact on performance is collisions and explosions. The reason for this is the creation of new independent blocks. A ship explodes, its pieces now become free of the main object. A moment ago there was only one object with one inertial state, now there's several each with their own inertial state, all at once instantly. But almost immediately after that's done, it's steady state again and performance goes back up to normal. A few more individual bits with their own inertial state will impact performance exactly zero especially for collisions and explosions since turrets do not collide nor do they explode. On the contrary, when its block blows up, the turret is deleted (and there's one fewer block to calculate) and instead we get pretty loot to pick up. In the steady state, the biggest impact is not inertial state, it's geometry, that's it. Even then, my 8 year old machine can handle it just fine. I'm running a GTX285, that's probably the oldest top GFX, and an i5 of the same generation as that GFX. What ancient machine do you have that its performance would be impacted so significantly? So you like to control your guns manually, then you don't need turrets. Fixed gun mounts is good enough for you. The game has what you need - turret lock blocks. You'd be giving up exactly nothing. Here's an idea for you. I thought of making a long gun port, like a tube, with a lock block all the way in the back. The turret would be invisible from all directions except directly in front, with corresponding protection just from the narrow angle to reach the lock block it's attached to. Projectiles would shoot out the gun ports. You could have 5 guns per square gun port, more for different shapes or if you use smaller lock blocks. Make it pretty with glass blocks for the port's sides like a clear tube so that it would glow as each shot goes through. Well, it's just an idea.

From wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion That's the anchor which allows the gun to be aimed at a moving target. The gun uses the ship's inertia to change its own position and/or orientation. It does this through a third object called a turret, which is composed primarily of 2 (3, if we also count the ship in absolute terms to obey the Third Law) moving parts interconnected via swivels that allow free range of motion on their respective axis, and via motors and gears that allow force to be transferred between those moving parts. Without the motors and gears, the swivels allow the gun to keep its aim due to its own inertia, minus friction across the contact surfaces. A properly designed turret (and properly designed control systems) allows the gun to keep its aim, in spite of the base's motion. That is not what happens in Avorion. What you refer to is Third Law. Third Law is the natural product of First Law. A more complete definition of Third Law is: When a body exerts a force on another body, this force acts on and overcomes both bodies' own inertia and in proportion to their respective masses and velocities.

To your question, this one. What is the anchor through which the ship causes the guns to lose tracking when the ship begins to turn? Besides friction. If you answered "the turret", it still does not tell us the specific anchor, there's many anchors in a turret. Is it the base? But the base is attached to the gun mount via a swivel that can rotate freely. Is it the gun mount? But the gun mount is attached to the gun via another swivel that can rotate freely. Is it the control systems, i.e. the gears, the motors, etc? But those things should be designed specifically to maintain tracking independently of the ship's motion. So what is the anchor here? It's a fair question. Technically, when the gun loses tracking, it is aiming, but of course it's aiming at the void, not at a valid target. So, what anchor causes the gun to now aim at the void, when just a moment ago it was aiming at a valid target?

Let's see if that's correct. Remove all this engineering, all the control systems, all the gears, but keep the turret otherwise intact so that it can still turn on its axis and the gun can still tilt up and down, all of it well lubricated. Now, what happens to the gun when the tank turns? Rather, what is the device through which motion of the tank is transferred to the turret and then to the gun? Without all that engineering, the only thing left is friction. So, apart from friction, what would cause the gun to follow the tank's motion? The answer, of course, is nothing. So what happens to the gun and why? Once you understand the answer, you now understand what all that engineering relies on to do its job. From there, we can understand what the control systems do to keep the gun lined up - they certainly do not purposely cause the gun to lose tracking when the tank turns. On the contrary, they apply force in the opposite direction, but only as much as needed to compensate for friction. Now that it's clear what's going on, what would cause the ship's turret to follow the ship's motion? Keep in mind that there's no gravity, so friction is much lower, and would only increase if the ship's motion pushed the turret and the gun toward their anchors, and only so long as it was accelerating. Once constant linear velocity is achieved, friction would return to its lowest. If it's spin, there's a tiny bit of linear acceleration initially, but almost immediately after, we're dealing with centripetal force, which would cause the turret and the gun to be continuously pushed against their anchors, thereby increasing friction, right up to the point where there was so much friction that they would become fixed in position against their anchors and would now start to spin at the same rate as the ship. When a ship turns, it's spin, so we are dealing with centripetal force, but is that force so strong when the ship just begins to turn? Back to the tank to illustrate the validity of such low tracking speed in Avorion. With the M1, which can spin quicker, the tank or the turret? More specifically, can the turret be spun in the opposite direction quicker than the tank's turning rate? If no, then it cannot maintain target lock, it can't do anything badass, but it does, therefore the turret can turn in the opposite direction quicker than the tank's turning rate. We're talking about a real tank with real tech. Avorion is about huge spaceships that jump light years to the next system in seconds. What kinds of retarded tech would be required to cause the ship's turret to be less nimble than the ship? Certainly not as advanced as current real tech used in the M1, right? Maybe it's actually really smart code, but it's missing a critical element that is found with real tech. What could that be, I wonder? Were you aware that tank guns are always mounted perfectly in balance? If they weren't, they'd either tend to stick up or down, and would require an external force to bring it back to level. If the gun is always level because it's mounted perfectly in balance, what happens to it when the tank hits a bump? It's the same answer as above. Smarter designs also have a fluid or weight system that transfers mass forward when the gun is loaded to compensate for the shell's mass which would otherwise tilt the gun upward. Even smarter systems do this automatically with the same control systems used for the rest of the turret.

The ship itself is your external force being applied on the turret. Physically applied because it's bolted on. Which is exactly what is currently happening, because there is inertia in the game already and it does apply to turrets. The turret is attached to the ship, the gun is not. It's attached to a joint that rotates on the x axis, which itself is attached to another joint that rotates on the z axis, which this one is attached to the base which is attached to the ship, which then becomes the base as both the turret's base and the ship now form a single object with regard to motion. These joints allow independent motion of the gun. Inertia would keep the gun pointed where it's at no matter what the ship did. Unless acted upon by external forces, i.e. motors, gears, rails, etc. These forces are what cause the gun to change its orientation, not the ship's motion. Ship's motion can only cause the gun to change its position, unless the ship's motion is far enough to bring the gun to its stops, then the gun follows ship's motion according but only at that point does it do so. When the gun is not even close to its stops, there's nothing (except friction) to cause the gun to change its orientation, unless the control mechanisms are designed to turn it with the ship for some reason. Is this what's happening, the gun is intentionally misaligned by its control mechanisms when the ship turns so that it must re-align with its current target? Is that what happens with an M1 tank? I don't think so, do you?

The arm turns with the body because it is attached via the shoulder. The shoulder is not a fixed bond, it allows the arm to move within a range of motion. When the body turns, the arm follows, but not instantly, it must catch up, as its own inertia tends to keep it where it is. As the body turns, it turns the shoulder, the shoulder in turn then pulls on the arm, the arm then moves according to this vector, gravity maintains the arm straight down, the arm then turns with the body with a slight tilt in the direction of the shoulder pull vector, this tilt is due in part to gravity. The question is, do turrets in Avorion have inertia, and would it fix multiple problems all at once if they had inertia, and would the modding community know what to do with it if they were given access to the functions through scripts for example?

That's a good argument. A turret's tracking speed will be affected by the ship's motion. For example, if the ship turns one way, and the target is the other way, the turret must overcome the ship's motion just to start moving toward the target. If its tracking speed is lower, it can never catch up. However, inertia - if it was implemented in the game for turrets - would compensate for this bond because no matter how quickly or suddenly the ship turns, the gun obeys inertia and could not follow the ship's motion in the first place, unless of course acted upon by an external force. You said it yourself, an M1 can take out a bunch of baddies real quick because its control systems are designed to take into account inertia. How much effort does the motors really need to keep the target sighted in? Very little, inertia does most of the work. But, if the target is in the same direction the ship is turning into, the turret must now turn harder to compensate for both its inertia and the ship's motion. The "imagine if turrets were tiny ships with brake thrusters" was an example to illustrate inertia, not a suggestion. However, the core block of a ship when we found it the first time contains invisible thrusters so that too already exists in the game. Incidentally, I found that out the hard way when I turned my core block before I went to build mode - I now had two core blocks overlapping each other, nothing I could do about it but destroy it and found a new ship.

Not a flaw, just a simple example of inertia. In fact, you just made my case. A ship's turrets cannot aim on their own, unless acted upon by an external force. A turret is two joints attached to each other and one of them attached to a base, which in turn is attached to the ship. The base is fixed to the ship, it cannot move freely, it follows the ship's motion in every way. (viewed from above) The first joint - the platform - rotates on the z axis. The second joint - the gun mount - rotates on the x axis. We will call the platform and the gun mount - moving parts. The base is fixed, it's not a moving part. In the case of a tank for example, the base is the tank itself. In the case of spaceships in Avorion, the base is the ship. These moving parts have mass and inertia, and will maintain their orientation unless acted upon by an external force. The mere act of changing their position - just like if we lifted the glass up and down - does not also change their orientation. For that, an external force is required, namely friction and control motors. However, when we turn the ship, turrets also change their orientation - they aim on their own. This indicates absence of mass and inertia. Turrets are fictitious entities that have no mass, no inertia, can accelerate and decelerate at infinite rate, with the only thing (the only external forces or natural forces) controlling their motion being some invisible force that keeps their orientation the same as the ship regardless of ship's motion, and tracking speed, and range of motion limits determined exclusively by the turret's own parameters (if the turrets reach and surpass these limits as the ship turns, these become external forces that cause the turrets to "aim" themselves).

To understand inertia, there's a few simple experiments you can do yourself. Fill a glass with water, put an object that floats - an ice cube will do the trick - on top of the water. Now turn the glass on its axis. See that the object maintains its orientation as you spin the glass. This is due to inertia - "continues in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force." In this case, the object's state is "at rest", and it will continue to remain at rest, pointed in the same direction in spite of the glass spinning under it. In order for the object to spin with the glass, it would have to be fixed to the glass, with some thread or something. Then, the external forces would be those threads that maintain the object fixed to the glass, and when you spin the glass, both the glass and the object would spin together. Or, put an ice cube on a plate, then move the plate around. The ice cube will stay in place, as the plate moves under it. The ice cube will maintain its orientation as well. This is best when you let the ice cube melt a little, so there's some water to act as lubricant between the ice cube and the plate. A turret is not the gun itself, it's a system that allows the gun inside it, to move freely and independently of the tank. It's the same as with the water in the glass that allows the ice cube to move freely and independently of the glass. They're all "part of" the glass, just like turrets are "part of" the ship, but not all parts are absolutely fixed to each other. When the tank turns, the gun "continues in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force." The external forces on a tank's turret are friction and the control motors. In Avorion builld mode, there's turret lock blocks that prevent turrets from turning. It's the same as with the threads to fix the floating object to the glass in the experiment above. The guns are now fixed to the ship, they will not turn independently, they will follow the ship's motion and always point in the same direction as the ship. Without this lock block, the turrets can move and spin independently of the ship, and should "continue in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force." The external forces here are the same as with a tank's turrets - friction and control motors. But turrets in Avorion don't continue in their existing state of rest even though they're not attached to lock blocks. It's as if the turrets had lock blocks by default, and those lock blocks would be unlocked temporarily only when the turrets would start to track something. So, when the ship turns, the turrets turn with the ship by default, even when they're currently tracking a target. But as I explained, there is no actual tracking, it's just pure target acquisition and re-acquisition, done in steps of stop-and-go. It's not really that they're locked, it's that they have no inertia. Imagine if the turrets were tiny ships instead. They'd have engines and thrusters, and their "tracking speed" would depend on the power of these engines and thrusters. They would have no other way to turn. When the ship turns, the turrets also fire their engines and thrusters to follow the ship's motion. Now imagine that we turn off the turret's engines and thrusters. What would happen to the turrets when the ship turned? Since the turrets have no power to turn, they'd maintain their orientation, while the ship turned. Avorion physics model is quite good. For example, when you hit a bit of wreckage with a projectile weapon, the object reacts and starts spinning and moving away. When two broken pieces of asteroid hit each other, they react and start moving according to that collision. When your ship collides with another, there's a reaction, both ships move according to the collision. When you move forward, if there was no automatic break thrust, the ship would continue to move in that direction even after you released the button, you'd have to move in the opposite direction to decelerate and then stop. When you do that, you have to be perfectly aligned, otherwise the ship now also moves down/up/left/right for a short while depending on the misalignment. There is inertia in the game already. Specifically for those objects that start spinning when you hit them with a projectile weapon, this should apply to turrets, as we "hit" them with the control motors to make them spin around. Without those control motors, they should just float, not moving, not spinning. When the ship turns, the turrets shouldn't turn with the ship be default, they should act like those bits of wreckage, unless the control motors power up to actively turn the turrets. However, the physics model is intentionally limited by artificial thruster brakes for all objects, including those bits of wreckage. They won't move forever, they'll stop at some point. They won't spin forever, they'll stop at some point and then just float in the same spot, not moving, not spinning. All objects have inertia, but it's limited by these artificial thrusters brakes. In fact, since there's friction in turrets because parts that move are in contact with each other, this friction could be emulated with thruster brakes of the appropriate power. So that's something else that's already there that could be implemented on turrets. The functions are all there.

I'm arguing for inertia, for turret behavior, and configuration further down this post. The other threads argue for unrelated functions. Several problems. Twitching, where the turret suddenly loses tracking for an instant, then tracks back just as suddenly. This shows absence of mass and absence of inertia, turrets can actually accelerate and decelerate at infinite rate. Chasing slow moving targets for ages, especially those pesky tiny bits of wreckage. This shows lack of actual tracking. Instead, it's pure target acquisition, and it's done as quickly as "tracking speed" allows, which means quicker turrets appear to track their target, when they merely re-acquire it more often per unit of time. They acquire a target, then stop, then re-acquire it, and so forth. With lasers especially, the beam will appear to make small jumps from one stop-and-go to the next. Losing target lock when moving ship. This is because there is no target lock and no inertia, there is only target acquisition. The instant the target or the ship moves and the turret is now misaligned, it must re-acquire the target, and it does that in steps of stop-and-go as explained above. Large difference between up-down and left-right, and sequential motion rather than simultaneous. The turret will move the gun up or down first to the appropriate position, then move base left or right until target is acquired. It's possible that tracking speed value modifies only left and right, while up and down is the same for all turrets. Or, up and down is much higher than it should be, precisely to compensate for the sequential motion. There's several other problems unrelated to inertia, I'm going to address them here. Target selection, priority, tandem vs independent, target reset for group. Target selection is done in some way, I don't know the specifics, but behavior on its own can tell us a lot about the actual method. In simplest terms, it's in range, closest to ship, until destruction, or until loss of line of fire. That's it, no other selection criteria. As many have noted, out of range is not a fire criteria, but it is an initial selection criteria. There's a problem with in range criteria, as sometimes it will fire but hit nothing because it's actually out of range. The problem is related to calculated distance. I think it's from center ship to center ship, rather than from turret to ship point target, i.e. it can hit specific points on a ship and a ship can be very long as we've seen where one end is way farther than the other end or even the center of the ship. But this problem also occurs with very small targets, where salvaging lasers will fire but hit nothing at close to their maximum indicated range. I've observed that this is about 5-10% of indicated range. There's no priority, no tandem vs independent, no individual reset. No most dangerous, no weakest, no most damaged, no area, etc. Salvaging lasers will chase tiny bits of wreckage because of target acquisition and re-acquisition, and because there's no mass/volume selection criteria or priority. Mining laser will select closest, often keeping lock long after they can't hit the target or even fire because it would hit player's own ship, i.e. hooded turret pods like I made on my current ship. It will not select targets independently, unless in certain situations where selection criteria make it appear as independent selection, i.e. one or more turrets can't fire on selected target and will select a different target in range. This is especially obvious when some turrets are fixed on the top face while other turrets are fixed on the bottom face but all facing forward and the targets are just slightly up or down from horizontal. That's one way to create independent target selection, by the way. With both salvaging and mining lasers, all targets will reset if one of the targets is destroyed. Then, new random targets are assigned. With salvaging lasers, it appears to be smart about selection when it's a bunch of small targets all close together on the same ship, but once they're broken up, that's it for smarts, they're back to chasing the same slow moving tiny bit of wreckage forever again. With mining lasers, if the asteroid is broken in two, often one or more turrets will select a different asteroid altogether, leaving that broken piece alone until that new target is destroyed. This is especially obvious when the new target is closer than the broken piece. All of these problems can be fixed and features improved by the modding community, so long as the internals are exposed. We can find the best inertia, the best target acquisition logic, the best user config UI for turret behavior and selection priority and all that, just give us the tools, we'll get it done. For example, I want to configure target selection priority based on area relative to turret position on ship. A simple method is one angle, where one side is high priority while the other side is low priority, or specific ratio or weights, i.e. 25%-50%-75% and so forth. In this method, a weight of zero allows to set an area limit so that turrets select targets only in the 100% area. I'd set my front mining turrets to prefer front targets rather than side targets. I want to configure salvaging lasers to prefer massive targets first, then clean up the tiny bits, or the reverse as the fancy gets me, or even systematic outside-to-inside to get the lifter's cargo holds first for example. I want to set some turrets to work in tandem or pairs and always select the same target. I want to be able to configure burst fire and energy usage. I got professional gunners level 3 controlling state of the art computer controlled independent targeting high precision long range ship busting BFG's, why are they so dumb? "Capt'n says burn, you burn, right through the generator capacity, right through battery reserve, to heck with systems failing, YOU BURN THEM LASORS, got it?" Non-burst guns can do burst fire, I just do it manually, why can't my gunners do the same? "Burst fire on a non--burst fire weapon? Can't do it, Capt'n, just can't, not in my nature, I keep that trigger pressed down." Simple method would be to set max generator/battery depletion, like 25% for example. For burst, just set number of shots and interval. The only thing that does not exist now is inertia for turrets, but inertia is already in the game for ships so it should be simple enough to implement it for turrets, methinks, but then I'm no coder so I wouldn't actually know. Priority mass/volume/danger/whatever, area selection bias, area limit, don't exist. Target selection (in a general sense), burst/energy, all that already exists and can be implemented by modders if they have the tools for it. -edit- Forgot. There's an actual bug where turrets at idle aim in some weird direction, preferably totally opposite their attachment position, i.e. back when positioned to point forward, or up when attached to front face for forward fire. Again, this can be fixed and even improved by the modding community. The code for idle should be part of the overall code for target selection, i.e. when target destroyed or when no target, do function, in this case aim where it's least practical. When new target is in range, turrets always - _always_ - have to turn back, overshoot for a few shots cuz anxious twitchy finger gunners you see, then line up. This problem does not occur with manual control, only with the three autofire modes.

Inertia. In a tank for example, the turret and the gun have mass therefore inertia, and this is taken advantage of when keeping the target in sight, as the servos adjust for friction, while inertia does the rest. Turrets in Avorion have no mass or inertia, they only have speed, left right up down. Give them mass and inertia, and a whole bunch of problems go away. For example, when turning the ship, turrets follow the ship's motion, as if they tracked with the ship, not with the target. But with mass and inertia, turrets keep their targets in sight while the ship turns, up to their limit of range of motion of course. The tracking stat would reflect the servos power, and the mass and inertia it is fighting to move the turret and gun. The servos would also have a maximum speed or RPM, which would give us the maximum turning speed. But until then, turrets would accelerate and decelerate rather than go full speed full stop instantly. As it stands, I guess the idea is to give the impression of an advantage when using smaller turrets with higher tracking speed. With inertia, only the initial target acquisition is affected by tracking speed. In fact, larger heavier turrets should track their target more accurately once they're on target. The advantage of smaller turrets is new target acquisition speed, while larger turrets (should) have the advantage of current target tracking accuracy, all this as a natural product of mass and inertia, not some arbitrary tracking number. Once we give turrets mass and inertia, we realize that they should be able to turn much quicker than a giant space ship by comparison. Turrets should be designed with the center of mass of the gun as close to the turret's axis of motion. As well, when the turret is attached to the front face of the ship and the gun is pointing directly in front, it should have less inertia for left right (z axis relative to turret base), but as much inertia for up down (x axis, or the gun itself). This could solve the twitching problem when tracking slow moving targets like tiny bits of wreckage that we just can't figure out why all turrets suddenly think is more important than that giant hull full of goodies. Second suggestion. Player config of turret behavior for turrets with independent targeting. For example, new target acquisition priority according to mass for unarmed turrets, so that my turrets don't suddenly become obsessed with useless bits of wreckage. Or, tandem vs independent also according to mass, especially for salvaging. With this, we could break up large wreckage quickly, then clean up the bits just as quickly, as the salvaging turrets (if more than one) would prioritize and work in tandem on large pieces first, then go independent for the smaller bits. Armed turrets would also benefit from this. For example, priority most dangerous, but only while it remains so, if the target's dangerous factor drops sufficiently (let's say its firepower rating goes to zero), switch to the next most dangerous, and so forth. Or, tandem for most dangerous, indy for weaker targets. Third suggestion. Ship control. I want the ability to control thrust brake. Make it a toggle where I can choose on the fly, whether it's on or player-controlled through directional keyboard controls. Also allow choosing whether it's all or just linear so that the ship doesn't just keep spinning on its axis especially for roll.