Watching this:

The falcon shouldn't have a 360 turret, those things only have a 90 degree turn at best if one of them is mounted reverse to the other, an aux arc like the firespray.

P.S.

Please don't take this seriously .

Oh my clone they never take us seriously, not until it's too late.

In all seriousness, I have frequently thought it would have made more sense thematically if you had a marker that you could rotate to a specific quadrant/edge of the base instead of "360* all day". Say after executing a maneuver you could rotate it, but it had to stay there for the rest of the round?

It likely would have been too complicated, but I think it would have fit and would have left some of the maneuvering/arc-dodging a bit more interesting, especially when the Falcon first came out.

I'm confused. If we're not supposed to take it seriously, then what's the point of the post?

Han and Luke are not facing front and back; they are facing up and down, in relation to the orientation of the ship. So, that's what gives them the full 360-degree angle of attack.

I remember staring quite confusedly at this scene trying to figure out where that ladder led to, given their seated positions, until I finally read one of the EU books that explained the gravity orientation shift that occurs while traversing the ladder.

Unless those turrets are pointed up in those shots, so that the backs of the seats are facing the main deck.

I'm confused. If we're not supposed to take it seriously, then what's the point of the post?

Han and Luke are not facing front and back; they are facing up and down, in relation to the orientation of the ship. So, that's what gives them the full 360-degree angle of attack.

I remember staring quite confusedly at this scene trying to figure out where that ladder led to, given their seated positions, until I finally read one of the EU books that explained the gravity orientation shift that occurs while traversing the ladder.

I always just assumed that there was a gravity field shift in those sections, good to know I guessed right.

I am still surprised we haven't seen some ships with more of either a broadside (side arcs) or 270 arc (with blind spot at the rear), if only for gameplay/variety reasons. Some of the huge ships have them, but they would be tactically interesting on large ships as well.

The falcon shouldn't have a 360 turret, those things only have a 90 degree turn at best if one of them is mounted reverse to the other, an aux arc like the firespray.

P.S.

Please don't take this seriously .

Going ahead and taking it seriously for a moment ( ), remember Han and Luke are sitting with their backs parallel to the ship's thrust--and, correspondingly, the neutral positions for the quad batteries are straight "up" and "down" relative to the ship's forward motion. So they do have a 360-degree field of fire; what they can't do is shoot a ship that's close to the Falcon's "equator".

Basically, take a pancake and stick an ice cream cone in the top. That's your field of fire.

EDIT: Multiply ninja'ed.

I am still surprised we haven't seen some ships with more of either a broadside (side arcs) or 270 arc (with blind spot at the rear), if only for gameplay/variety reasons. Some of the huge ships have them, but they would be tactically interesting on large ships as well.

I am looking forward to using the firing arcs on the upcoming Imperial Raider , especially on the forward section. Good luck trying to get out of that ship's firing arc!

In all seriousness, I have frequently thought it would have made more sense thematically if you had a marker that you could rotate to a specific quadrant/edge of the base instead of "360* all day". Say after executing a maneuver you could rotate it, but it had to stay there for the rest of the round?

Isn't the fact you can only fire at one ship at a time pretty much representing this? You're essentially swiveling around to the side of the ship that has your target on it.

In all seriousness, I have frequently thought it would have made more sense thematically if you had a marker that you could rotate to a specific quadrant/edge of the base instead of "360* all day". Say after executing a maneuver you could rotate it, but it had to stay there for the rest of the round?

Isn't the fact you can only fire at one ship at a time pretty much representing this? You're essentially swiveling around to the side of the ship that has your target on it.

Kind of, but if you had to affix your arc in the game, other ships could try to dodge it still, which is not possible the way it was implemented.

I'm not trying to say this needs to happen or anything, just thought it would have made more sense (to me at least).

I always loved how fighters could out run the turrets for a bit, but that there's no escape in X-wing miniatures

Going ahead and taking it seriously for a moment ( ), remember Han and Luke are sitting with their backs parallel to the ship's thrust--and, correspondingly, the neutral positions for the quad batteries are straight "up" and "down" relative to the ship's forward motion. So they do have a 360-degree field of fire; what they can't do is shoot a ship that's close to the Falcon's "equator".

...

Actually, that is the zone that BOTH guns get the opportunity to fire at the same ship. I seem to recall reading something calling it "money row" or something.

which is not possible the way it was implemented.

If you have two guns and each one covers half the ship, there would be little chance of getting out of the sights of one of the two guns. It may take a bit of time to rotate a full 180, but at most each gun would have to move 90 deg's.

which is not possible the way it was implemented.

If you have two guns and each one covers half the ship, there would be little chance of getting out of the sights of one of the two guns. It may take a bit of time to rotate a full 180, but at most each gun would have to move 90 deg's.

In game (2D) space sure. But if we continue with the theme of this being space (3D) and it being unlikely that both the dorsal and ventral guns would be able to shoot at the same ship in most situations since each one can only cover a hemisphere, then it becomes much more meaningful. Each gun may have to move as much as 180 degrees to target a ship, and both guns would almost never be able to target the same ship (unless it was a big ship, like the CR-90), And that doesn't even factor in that a ship that moves from one hemisphere to the other during combat would likely be unnoticed by the gunner on the new side (since presumably, he'd have other ships targeted).

Again, I'm not saying the game isn't balanced as-is or anything, just that in my mind it doesn't really make much sense that the Falcon can shoot anything at will every round when in a more real setting it is very possible that even basic TIEs could avoid the guns a good amount of the time if they were savvy pilots. The fact that you don't even get a chance to try in game is a bit of a stretch.

In a more real setting, the ships would zoom past each other at incredible speeds that would make dogfighting impossible.

In a more real setting, the ships would zoom past each other at incredible speeds that would make dogfighting impossible.

Yep in real life they wouldn't get anywhere near each other, they would use fire and forget technology.

Or accuracy correctors.