In recent games, I found that I can not attack the enemy behind even I press Free key. It is strange.
I wonder someone has the same problem with me. Or this is a bug?
This is a big loss for cover ops to only attack a enemy in your forward. Sometimes you should attack the enemy behind when you are run,
you did not-really care to aligning your ship and your shooting angle, now you do. I don’t see what is the problem with - you wanna shoot something - face it.
Ive already talked with you AdamWest about this. Just learn to use Q and E and there will be no difference (actually you will loose the enemy less often from screen): firing angle for the top of the ship is incredibly large, use it. You should be totally fine with 90 ping. However, dont expect to fly properly with 300 ping or so, fire angle reduced or not, you will barely hit dogfighting interceptors with such high wobble and delayed movement.
I changed mouse settings to more sensitive. It helps me with turning towards the enemy faster and spares me an engine slot.
.
Don’t fixate on this change as a “turn key fix”, it was a general problem
xKost, Ok, I will drop this discussion after this as: I seem to be one of very few that care. I can live with that. It also doesn’t kill my performance and I might just be a little butt hurt as I really like interceptors and any change could get me into a frenzy, (we all get that once in a while.)
Can you or anyone explain what the general problem was then. I stay pretty active and informed on the forums and patch notes yet have a hard time finding the general problem that interceptors can use free aim or firing behind them.
The reason I and many came to the conclusion that it was a turn key problem was:
The russian 2nd place tutorial winner complained about the turnkey which was the entire purpose of his winning post. (there was a large russian discussion and I thought I read this was one of the fixes. thanks google translate.)
Around the same time there was a NA complaint about turn key. There are many players well respected that don’t like T5 turnkey exploit.
There was very little to no explanation as to why this occurred and most importantly the 1.35 patches appears to be reluctant to provide a great description as to why this was needed or happened.
So a simple explanation and I’ll drop it like 3rd period French.
Papitas, thanks I’ll try changing my play style to match
AdamWest…
You just continue circle fighting, but stop using the regular speed setup. I won’t publish my Eagle-B setup, but I will tell you that it works at about 250% effectivity of any other covert ops interceptor in the entire game if you use it.
I think you may know the one I am speaking of 
Kosty, we know you don’t see the problem here. This solution is actually in your ballpark of thinking. BUT you just brought few interesting points.
a) you just said to one of the very good intie pilots to switch to another role
b) I think Adam already has that
c) if you have bad build, skill will not help you much
d) Great that you mentioned it. This game was always paper -> rock -> scissors. I have no idea why someone came up with “yeah, we will lock the turrets on inites. Strafe builds will work, rotation and dogfight - naaa, only Taka is using that properly, rest is just spinning around.” instead of adding few counters to Tackler/guard/ecm modules (like Gravi Beam - “when hit, reduces rotation for 1 second by xx%, effects stacks if the beam stays on the target longer”, or the guard module “reduces speed and rotation of any ship in the range”. That way - dogfights can be still circular, but natural inite enemies could counter them properly.
e) I just don’t see the point of comparing tank killer/CAS to ASF, however if you are comparing recon to recon, you should have similar capabilities
Also - even in real life modern fighters have “out of the bore” aiming capabilities, allowing them to engage targets even in different quadrants from the front one. Missiles that are designed to do so, can be even fired backwards in some situations, but usually they can be launched against targets up to 90 degrees from the direction the aircraft is facing. Cannon is always viewed as a last resort now as it requires direct aiming of the whole aircraft. So we have primary weapon system capable of shooting in frontal half-sphere and secondary system that needs the nose of the aircraft to be pointed in the target direction. In this game the roles are switched - guided missiles are secondary, guns are primary - but the whole principle of primary system shooting out of the bore targets was here from the beginning.
Before you start to yell at me, please take a moment to think about alternatives to butchering interceptor capabilities and maybe you will have some other ideas to be implemented in later patches.
PS Also - in real life development are small turrets for shooting down enemy missiles, but I think you know what I have in mind.
PS2. If you will want response from me in this topic, It can take a few weeks as I am generally not active anymore. For such situation, I would like to apologize upfront.
a) I did not say change roles, you did.
b) You can specialize even within a class-role, you can make a CovOp/Recon excel at hunting down inties or you can make them bust a frigate in a matter of seconds, but i am sure you know that much. Even on that video, you can clearly see the CovOp not built for dog-fighting, it has good enough rotation and strafe to deal with fighters and frigs, and before this change it would be enough to deal with inties simply due camera rotation/high sensitivity mouse. Why when you build a Frigate to deal with inties you heavily invest in projectile speeds? Why when you build a fighter to deal with inties at close range you invest heavily in rotation and chose weapons accordingly, why interceptors don’t need to do that? Majority of inty players (better ones) Ignore specialization options, and always make same “do-it-all” build, tier to tier, ship-to-ship, now “do-it-all” got weaker, which makes specialization more viable, hence more variety. If anything it just raises the skill level required to fly interceptors, what is wrong with that?
c) There is a bad build, and there is a bad build that good enough to deal with worse pilots
d) If you think Rotation does not work, than you you should try again, because it does. “paper > rock >scisors” - exactly the idea and an intent of this change - so far people try to build and use it as “interceptor > (paper/rock/scissors)”
e) no, recon =/=recon, or any other role for that mater, there are plenty of ways to specialize each role to be really great at one thing and average-ok at others, that changes the game-flow drastically. I have a peregrine with 1x engine, it has about 160 pitch, 2x caps+3x CPU into DPS (+1 proton), RF BLatser/Suppressor with supernova/curved the whole idea of such build is to bust fighters and frigs, yet i was easily, with next to no effort outdoing Gray Falcons in a dogfight controlled by meh pilots, like ArcTic for example, to me this is wrong, a cruise gauss tackler busting a Destroyer kind of wrong, i still think i can go toe-toe with it, but it will requer effort.
@PS2 does it mean you have not even tried new firing arc on interceptors prior to making this comment?
Don’t fixate on this change as a “turn key fix”, it was a general problem
xKost, Ok, I will drop this discussion after this as: I seem to be one of very few that care. I can live with that. It also doesn’t kill my performance and I might just be a little butt hurt as I really like interceptors and any change could get me into a crazy frenzy, (we all get that once in a while.)
Can you or anyone explain what the general problem was then. I stay pretty active and informed on the forums and patch notes yet have a hard time finding the general problem that interceptors can use free aim or firing behind them.
The reason I and many came to the conclusion that it was a turn key problem was:
The russian 2nd place tutorial winner complained about the turnkey which was the entire purpose of his winning post. (there was a large russian discussion and I thought I read this was one of the fixes. thanks google translate.)
Around the same time there was a NA complaint about turn key. There are many players well respected that don’t like T5 turnkey exploit.
There was very little to no explanation as to why this occurred and most importantly the 1.35 patches appears to be reluctant to provide a great description as to why this was needed or happened.
So a simple explanation and I’ll drop it like 3rd period French.
Papitas, thanks I’ll try changing my play style to match
Just because sometimes someone does not complain about something, does not mean there are no problems or potential.
Manual Turning was just a last drop, there are always different ways to approach different issue, there were different proposals, but devs decided to go with this one, and as you said your self " It also doesn’t kill my performance", I like this particular change because unlike some others, this one does not limit game-play, it forces the variety, and IMHO increases the skill requirement for flying interceptors
3)SC “traditions” :005j:
The below ship cut-off is hilarious… 45 degrees then no shot at all 
i wonder what would happen with realistic fire angles (meaning each model would have different fire angles)…
Then the Mauler would probably suck in fact most frigates would have either all top guns or half and half and a lot of no shot zones due to funky gun placement next to hull blocking a large portion ;p
Hehe… no more doggy style. :fed015:
Of course I thought of dog fighting if anyone is wondering.
i wonder what would happen with realistic fire angles (meaning each model would have different fire angles)…
It would be a hell to program for devs. Even if I like the idea a lot, it’s not doable. The devs should program death zones for every ship model in the game, and trust me, there are lots of them (I think that regular ships are 170 kinda, and because there are 3 versions of each ship, 170/3 = about 57 models to program)
now that turnkeying is dead expert control mode has a lot of merit for interceptors. This is because with the right amount of turn and strafe you can orbit people with your nose pointed at them.
Unfortunately, this is not as effective as it used to be since afterburners becan giving you full speed regardless of throttle settings. A certain amount of forward/reverse adjustments are needed but it requires a subtle touch, not full blast.
On 17/04/2016 at 8:52 PM, ShonFrost said:
It would be a hell to program for devs. Even if I like the idea a lot, it’s not doable. The devs should program death zones for every ship model in the game, and trust me, there are lots of them (I think that regular ships are 170 kinda, and because there are 3 versions of each ship, 170/3 = about 57 models to program)
Hum nah.
They doesn’t need at all to create such thing at all.
Just look at how turrets works in game, they already have such thing implemented (turrets don’t point where you aim if they can’t).
If they made that the number of turrets to shot depend on the angle instead of the ship, it’s because it would be a pain to balance ship models equally.
if I ever got a peregrine, this is probably where I would start (with orbiting in mind) while using pulse lasers. Keep in mind that I don’t know the level 10 stats and can’t be bothered to look them up, and the fit would largely depend on what the environment is like, but the theme would stay roughly the same. I’m perfectly happy with gunships, though. I doubt I’ll ever be enthusiastic enough to want a project covops. I switched from covops to gunships a long time ago simply because gunships are more durable while maintaining that pick a target kill a target mentality.
