Topic: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Energy drainers have their uses and currently they are only usable in turret slots as I understand. Well, no EM or laser user is going to waste their gun slots to fit one. Missile users don't ned to waste any slots, they can fit all launchers, their main weapon, and drainers in the turret slots. This is not a fair system atall. I hope it gets changed, energy drainers need to be equippable in both turret and missile slots.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Umm, I don't know how you figured they go into turret slots...
Energy drainers are using "misc" slots.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- Bill Cosby

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Umm i mean the better solution is to change the "missile" slots on non-missile bots to "missile/misc".

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

yeah i agree that missile slot feels pretty useless. why would a em bot use missiles too unless they had a different purpose then just damage cause thats why we got the turrets already. It should be something that would have more of a support function or to compliment those turrets.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Maybe I just got confused, but I thought I heard that a missile mech can fit 4 launchers and 2 energy drains, but a turret mech cannot fit any energy drains atall if he fits 4 turrets. Definetly not balanced if that's the way it is. Turret mechs should be able to potentially fit 4 turrets and 2 energy drains also.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Sinister wrote:

Maybe I just got confused, but I thought I heard that a missile mech can fit 4 launchers and 2 energy drains, but a turret mech cannot fit any energy drains atall if he fits 4 turrets. Definetly not balanced if that's the way it is. Turret mechs should be able to potentially fit 4 turrets and 2 energy drains also.

The point is, the hard points are grouped on slots. So missile hard point are usually not grouped, where as the turret hardpoints are almost always grouped. For this reason turret bots have less utility.

But yes, utility slots ought to be independant, as in a missile slot should not be limited to missiles.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

/signed
You should re-evaluate the non-missiles bots misc/turrets/missiles slots, please smile

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

/signed

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Ah ok, now I got it smile
I'll ask Alf whether this is intended.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- Bill Cosby

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

So.... any update on this? Not fair that turret users can't use energy drains without sacrificing their main weapon type but missile users can.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-16 12:06:09)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Well Alf said this is intended. As it is apparent from the respective EW-specialized robots, missile bots' ewar of choice are the chassis-based ones, so they get a dedicated slot for them, while the other factions' "specializations" are head-slot ewar modules, so they have to sacrifice offensive power if they want to fit chassis ewar modules too.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- Bill Cosby

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

DEV Zoom wrote:

Well Alf said this is intended. As it is apparent from the respective EW-specialized robots, missile bots' ewar of choice are the chassis-based ones, so they get a dedicated slot for them, while the other factions' "specializations" are head-slot ewar modules, so they have to sacrifice offensive power if they want to fit chassis ewar modules too.

Hmm I really don't like that, perhaps I'm too used to that game, where energy drains/neuts are not considered EW modules, but energy modules, because they don't really interfere with the computers of the target, they simply drain energy.

I haven't tested this yet, but from what I can imagine, this makes primary missile users incredibly overpowered, as it is missiles don't drain much energy, with good skills add a couple of energy drainers and we'll see missile mechs beating turret mechs even in situations where it's 1 missile mech up against 2 turret mechs. 2 medium energy drains at 90 AP/10 seconds each is 180 AP stolen from the enemy and added to your own AP every 10 seconds, combine this with the low AP use of missile launchers and they'll be running armor repairers or shields like crazy.

Infact, take a look at the required extensions to use energy drainers/neuts, they require all engineering skills, how on earth could you be classing them as an electronic warfare module when all the related skills are in engineering?

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-16 16:01:23)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Infact i'm certain now that this isn't right, forget the EW bots, the game should not be made imbalanced just because one factions EW bots was given energy drains as a primary EW mode, I don't honestly see how just because their EW bots get a bonus to energy drains that non EW bots are effected by it. You guys have made an error here.

A missile mech can potentially fit 4 medium launchers and 2 energy drains, none of the turret bots can match up to this, because they can only fit 4 turrets and no energy drains, or 3 turrets and 1 drain, losing a large chunk of dps just to fit the drain, sure they can still put missile launchers on, but their bonuses are for turrets, not missiles, 50% damage bonus from robotics skill at level 10 is a lot to lose.  You can also be sure they will have put all their EP into turrets.

Not only can the above fitted missile mech fit all that, but he can still fit head slot EW modules, tell me, what do the turret mechs have to make up for this? Nothing, there is nothing, missile mechs have a flat out advantage. of being able to run 100% dps + energy drain + head slot EW setup. The best the turret mech can hope to achieve is 50-75% dps, energy drain + head slot EW

Missile mech (tyrannos) = 100% dps + energy drain + head slot EW setup

Turret mech (kain or artemis) = 50-75% dps + energy drain + head slot EW setup or 100% dps, no energy drain + head slot EW setup. The kain and artemis dps drops to 50-75% depending on if they fitted 1 or 2 energy drains.

I seriously hope you guys see the problem here, the artemis and kain don't get any advantage over the tyrannos to make up for the lack of dps caused by fitting a drain, I can not see how you think this is balanced. I think you guys are looking at this the wrong way. Basically, so what if energy draining is the racial EW for the missile factions EW bots, why should this matter on non primary EW bots? If this were balanced, all EW modules would go into MISC slots and not head slots, and each faction would be able to fit their own EW type without using up their primary weapon slots, but that's not how it is.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-16 16:23:40)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

A more simpler way to put this:

Energy drain/neuts are an exclusive module, usable only to the missile bots without a penalty (penalty being sacrificing main dps slots)

Your reasoning is that this is ok because energy drains are primary missile bots EW choice, right... except that EM and laser bots have no exclusive EW module of their own, missile bots can have the best of all worlds, they got 100% of their damage, they got misc slot EW (energy drain) and they got head slot EW.

Here I offer another solution to fix this issue, since you're classing energy drains/neuts as a standard EW module, then they should become one, make it so that energy drain/neuts require a head slot instead of a misc slot. It's either this or just let everyone fit drains/neuts in their misc slots without consuming missile OR turret slots.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-16 16:42:22)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

im a bit on Sinisters side here,
but not in all points.

Alf says that the Empires Main ability is to maker their enemys completly helpless while bashing them away with missiles at close range

Thelodicas tactic should be? Demobbing enemy far away and hit them with the long range Lasers before they can shoot back?

Nuimquol tactic should be then intensive use of ECM and Supressor to prevent their enemys from getting a lock at any range?

Considering this, its a stone-paper-scissor decision who gets the first lock. Missile bots are in a slight advantage here, because if they get the lock, the can drain the accus of their targets empty - and without accu-power, the thelodica bots are just dead hitpoints (shield, demob, ecm, weapons, repairer - everything needs huge ammounts of power)

i just dont like the fact, that those bots which need the least ammount of energy, can use the drainers without penalty dps wise, and those with the most critical energymanagment have to sacrifice dps for it -
while i could imagine that over longer fights, a thelodica bot with one drainer instead of a med laser could sustain his firepower longer over time -> DPS is not everything if you cant hold it up long enough to kill your target.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Hope this topic doesn't get forgotten about.

It's pretty simple really, missile bots can fit energy neuts without penalty (loss of weapon slots)but turret bots can't. Devs say this is because drains are missile bots main EW form.

So to balance this the way they are doing it, it needs to be changed so that missile bots have to lose a missile launcher slot in order to fit ECM or sensor surpressors, because that's the only fair way to do it.

The better solution though is to scrap their whole way of thinking on this. Energy drains should be usable on all bots without penalty because that's the only way to balance this without implementing some very restrictive features that essentially turn this into a class based game. Missile EW bots will still have their advantage when using energy drains because they get huge bonuses to energy draining.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

DEV Zoom wrote:

Well Alf said this is intended. As it is apparent from the respective EW-specialized robots, missile bots' ewar of choice are the chassis-based ones, so they get a dedicated slot for them, while the other factions' "specializations" are head-slot ewar modules, so they have to sacrifice offensive power if they want to fit chassis ewar modules too.

This makes sense, problem is that other factions do not have dedicated 'extra' head slots for non-chassis e-war.

Having to lose non-bonused weapon slots is not the same as sacrifying limited head slots.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Maynard Benaui wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

Well Alf said this is intended. As it is apparent from the respective EW-specialized robots, missile bots' ewar of choice are the chassis-based ones, so they get a dedicated slot for them, while the other factions' "specializations" are head-slot ewar modules, so they have to sacrifice offensive power if they want to fit chassis ewar modules too.

This makes sense, problem is that other factions do not have dedicated 'extra' head slots for non-chassis e-war.

Having to lose non-bonused weapon slots is not the same as sacrifying limited head slots.

Finally someone understands, although it's not exactly difficult to get.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-19 17:48:12)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

I think my biggest issue here, is the fact that turret bots get a slot that they can only fit a missile launcher on. That just seems silly to me. Especially since missile bots get to fit other stuff in their extra slot.

A missile only slot has no utility, where as a utility slot has, well, utility. I think that's the biggest imbalance here. One bot gets a choice, the others get dps (a tiny little bit, which also cost more EP to train for) or nothing. Feels unbalanced to me.

I know energy drainers also require EP, but judging from that other game, I really feel that energy drainers/neuts are far more useful than a little bit more dps.

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Matsuro Shi wrote:

I think my biggest issue here, is the fact that turret bots get a slot that they can only fit a missile launcher on. That just seems silly to me. Especially since missile bots get to fit other stuff in their extra slot.

A missile only slot has no utility, where as a utility slot has, well, utility. I think that's the biggest imbalance here. One bot gets a choice, the others get dps (a tiny little bit, which also cost more EP to train for) or nothing. Feels unbalanced to me.

I know energy drainers also require EP, but judging from that other game, I really feel that energy drainers/neuts are far more useful than a little bit more dps.

Agreed, energy drainers are a highly important part of many setups, it's a highly desired module and there's no reason it should be exclusive to missile bots without penalty yet give huge penalty to turret bots that no turret bot is ever going to fit one. It's not like missile bots have to lose missile launcher slots to fit ECM jammers and sensor surpressors.

When we're looking at a fight between two MECHS, one being missile and one being turret, the missile bot automatically has the upper hand because he is able to fit more overall useful modules than the turret bot. As it is missile launchers use almost no energy. Turrets use tons of energy, and as a turret user I want to fit energy drains in my utility slots, not missile launchers. But not if I have to sacrifice turret slots to do it, if that's the way it till be, everyone should just use missile bots and you can remove all turret bots aswell as the other 2 player factions from the game.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-19 17:55:09)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

You are forgetting, that missile bots have dps hit, gropho vs artemis, gropho, 6 medium missiles, 10s to reload weapon, 100 damage per hit to some mech, artemis, 4 lasers, 4 sec reload, 98 damage per hit to the same mech..... so laser mech has bigger dps then missile heavy mech... if you use Seth, with more tunings, you will get the reload maybe to 3 sec.. with 6 lasers... its 3 times more then gropho!!

So i am happy, that gropho is able to tank these huge dps and drain that seth(if he is lucky and gets close enough) ;-)

Last edited by Asruf (2010-01-20 11:26:58)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

In my tests missiles had the best dps of all weapons.

Missiles should have the lowest dps because missile launchers require practically no energy to fire. For missile users firing is a non issue with AP, they get to use almost 100% of their AP for other modules.

Turrets use a lot more AP, even EM guns do and my guess is lasers won't really be any better than EM guns once they are fixed. It wouldn't make sense for missiles to use no AP and do the most damage and at the furthest range.

If missiles still have the best dps, the best range, and use basically no AP to fire, then I know which faction I and everybody else who wants to play an imbalanced game will be.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-20 12:18:08)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Sinister, you seem to always press the positives of missiles but never mention the negatives. Maybe balance your argument a bit better instead of being being largely biased (from what I've seen).

Some examples;

-Low Rate of Fire
-Significant Flight Time
-Lowest Range of all Weapon Types (A proper fit taken into account)
-No Falloff. Quite a problem in PvP as your target can walk just 1m out of your optimal and they receive no damage.
-Low Loaded Ammo Amount

Last edited by Styx (2010-01-20 12:28:05)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

Styx wrote:

Sinister, you seem to always press the positives of missiles but never mention the negatives. Maybe balance your argument a bit better instead of being being largely biased (from what I've seen).

Some examples;

-Low Rate of Fire
-Significant Flight Time
-Lowest Range of all Weapon Types (A proper fit taken into account)
-No Falloff. Quite a problem in PvP as your target can walk just 1m out of your optimal and they receive no damage.
-Low Loaded Ammo Amount

Perhaps they do have a lower rate of fire, but they do a lot damage per hit to make up for it. The missile assault bot is the exception and has a cycle time and damage bonus so with max extensions that bot will have a 2.4 second cycle time on its launchers with no missile tunings.

You're right about one thing, I never do take flight time into account. I haven't personally seen how long it takes a missile to cover 350m. But then again missile launchers cost almost no AP to fire, would you swap roles with turrets? How about missiles are now instant hit but drain a significant amount of AP, and turrets now have a flight time but drain 1 ap per shot. Many turret users will be happy to swap with you.

Missiles have the longest range of all weapon types, saying that turrets should just waste slots just to try to catch up is a bad argument. While lasers can gain a slight range advantage by fitting a tracking upgrade, EM guns would need to fit up to 3.

Why would you need falloff? Missile have the longest range of all weapon types, missiles go further than EM guns and lasers optimal range. Only the first 20% range of falloff is useful, anything outside that small range will do damage so low it's not worth wasting ammo or AP on. a 100 metre falloff is only actually useful for up to 20 metres outside your optimal.

Low ammo amount? That's just to balance the fact that missiles in general shoot slower and do a lot more damage per hit than turrets. That's why EM guns hold 40 ammo, they have an average cycle time and average damage per hit, lasers have a super fast cycle time, low damage per hit, so they hold a lot more ammo. Missiles have the slowest cycle time (waspish is an exception) and do the most damage per hit, so they get 20 ammo. There is no disadvantage to any of the weapon types, ammo amount is balanced based on rate of fire of the weapon and rate of fire is based on damage per hit.

Missiles have the advantage of having only one type of launcher, so they can switch between short range high damage or long range less damage on the field.

Missiles rarely miss, a well trained missile character will never miss. Against light bots their hits will apparently do a little less damage, but we've all seen the true damage a medium missile does against light bots. Turret users can't hope to achieve this kind of instagib because they will just flat out miss a lot of hits while missiles will be hitting for almost full damage and no misses.

On top of all of this, missile users can fit conventional EW aswell as energy drain EW without losing DPS while turret users have to lose a turret for every drain, essentially locking turret users out from a main form of utility module.

Missiles have way more pros and less cons than turrets.

Last edited by Sinister (2010-01-20 13:23:02)

Re: Energy drainers need to be usable in turret AND missile slots.

basically, the missile slot on laser/em bots just dont compliment that bot. It just doesnt make sence since i dont see the supportive reason for it, in military design sence i dont see it either.
Only if you really had the spare fitting reqs youd fit one for the little bit of extra dps your not specced for and which also gives issues in what range you should be from your target. Missiles are just dps, theres no specialised missiles with effects or anything.
Id say remove the slot or do something with it like make missiles with usefull effects or something like -resists, or change the slot..