So, about 'dem turrets

[TechSY730]

How are people feeling about the balance of the turrets right now? Both the Mk. I versions and the knowledge costs of the higher marks?
Keep in mind, not only things like range, dps, and health are important, both individually and cap wise, but also metal, crystal, and energy costs (which are very important in the early game, where often times you need turrets the most), and caps.

My thoughts?

The knowledge costs for the higher marks just seem weird and all over the place. I don't see that much rhyme or reason to it. I get that some turrets have more strategic value than others (which is why things like missile turrets Mk. II have a higher knowledge cost than Mk. II basic turrets), but a lot of times not even that seems to line up.

The flak turret seems underpowered. It dies way too easily thanks to its range. What's that you say? The flak turret has one of if not the top cap HP of the turrets? True. And yet, not even that huge amount of extra health is enough to offset the severe "curse" of its low range. I might accept a "glass cannon" type thing if it did good damage, but it doesn't really. Even against a close-combat or swarmer ship (its intended role to counter, and what they have bonuses against), it barely scratches the paint of these. I know that they are intended against groups of units thanks to splash, but this is almost nullified by their small splash radius and there low number of targets they can hit per explosion. Granted, in those few cases where it does manage to hit a lot of stuff, flak turrets lay on the pain. However, these severe restrictions to their splash effect make this too rare to be worth their current single target DPS.
So can they either get enough cap HP to offset their low range or enough DPS to offset this effectively low cap HP? Or a little bit of both?
I wouldn't be opposed to a slight range buff, but I do like their place as the "short ranged" turret. It gives them character.

Finally, why do all the turrets have a .1 or whatever multiplier to command-grade? Is this even nessecary anymore? It just feels cheap when the AI sends hunter killers at ya.
I guess a better question is, why do hunter/killers (and astro-trains for that matter) have command grade hull type? Shouldn't something like, IDK, "heroric" hull type, which no turret (and no ship for that matter) gets a bonus or a penalty to? (This would also help spire rams and mini-rams, though in those cases, they may need a .5 or something to "heroric").

[Cinth]

Ummm... even though I use most of the turrets, I have no idea   I should probably look and see what kind of carnage they create.

Speaking on types though, Lightning and Flak, I don't use at all.  They just don't live long enough in my late game.

[Winge]

Let's see...I'm with you on Flak Turrets, I rarely even use the Mk I versions.  When I do feel the need to use them, I always put them under a shield, for the same reasons you mentioned.  Stacked Lightning Turrets, on the other hand, is great for when you can trap enemies near them, and their range is actually pretty decent.  I understand the varying K costs, especially for Missile Turrets (my favorite! <3), but in general turrets feel a bit too weak for their K costs--keep in mind, I play relatively low AIP most games, so I need offensive ship unlocks.  Mk I especially suffers due to a lack of Radar Dampening.  Alternatively, increasing their cap bonus DPS would make turrets much better in my book.  I'm thinking part of the problem is that turrets simply haven't kept up with the 'power creep' from superweapons and the like.

As far as Hunter/Killers...well, I think that's intentional .  Not saying I agree with it, but then again, H/Ks are supposed to be mean.

[Cinth]

Exos are my main concern and they pretty much wipe out anything close to the wormhole they enter through.

[Wingflier]

Here's something that has always bothered me with turrets:

Look at the Lightning Turret - It completely ignores armor and does decent damage in an aoe, but look at it's reload time: EIGHTEEN SECONDS.

So if you put several over a wormhole (seems like the best spot to me), here is what happens:

1. Wave is announced.
2. 2 minutes later, wave arrives.
3. One or two fighters precede the wave, and proc the Lightning Turret shot.
4. The entire wave of hundreds of ships come through, and most of them are out of range before the Lightning Turret shoots again 18 seconds later.

Whattttttt?

[sojourner]

Personally, I think turrets should have their caps lowered across the board(excluding gravity, tractor, and HBS). Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there ever any compelling reason to not place turrets in clumps of 5? I know it's not incredibly micro-heavy to control click each time you want to place a turret; however, if it's unnecessary it's just clutter. And besides, it bugs my OCD that they don't come out even.

[TechSY730]

Here's something that has always bothered me with turrets:

Look at the Lightning Turret - It completely ignores armor and does decent damage in an aoe, but look at it's reload time: EIGHTEEN SECONDS.

So if you put several over a wormhole (seems like the best spot to me), here is what happens:

1. Wave is announced.
2. 2 minutes later, wave arrives.
3. One or two fighters precede the wave, and proc the Lightning Turret shot.
4. The entire wave of hundreds of ships come through, and most of them are out of range before the Lightning Turret shoots again 18 seconds later.

Whattttttt?

That's just the AI playing smart.

I do the same thing by sending a "distraction transport" through a wormhole first sometimes.

Still, I mentioned in another thread about maybe having the AI do this sort of "distraction" some of the times, instead of always, and when they do so, making it such that the distraction actually has a bit of "teeth" (like maybe 1/10 of what would of been in the wave, rather than always 3 mk. I fighters, and just send in the rest of the 9/10s normally). I mean, I for sure don't do that transport thing every time. This would feel less annoying but still accomplishing the same goal.


Yes, lightning turrets suffer similar issues to flak turrets, just to a lesser degree.


Though I forgot to think about something in my analysis, the fact that lightning and flak turrets do 75% instead of the standard 25% of damage while under a forcefield. I usually don't take advantage of that for my flak and lightnings by the wormhole. Can anyone who does say anything about this helping their effectiveness?
If it does help out quite a bit without sacrificing command station defensibility too much, then maybe they need only a bit of a buff rather than a moderate one I was thinking originally.

[Winge]

@Cinth
Yeah, and that's why I think part of the issue with turrets is power creep.  I'm not sure if that's good, bad, or indifferent, but it sure feels like turrets could be stronger/tougher without breaking anything.  I almost never unlock turrets, unless I need them to unlock something else.  The drones aren't enough added incentive for me to unlock them when I play at 8+.

@Wingflier
True.  That said, I like Lightning turrets for their effect on threatballs, not waves, for the same reason you mentioned.  I also put them farther back from the wormhole, so that their range only partially covers it.  On that note, why do those 1-3 fighters always appear?  IIRC, I've even seen them come when I have no threat next to the planet in question...

[TechSY730]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there ever any compelling reason to not place turrets in clumps of 5?

Yes. For me at least.

For planets I don't care about very much, I will place just a single of each turret type by command station.

And even for non-chokepoint planets that I care some about but are still vulnerable, I usually place 3 of each turret type by the inbound wormholes.

This helps conserve cap and energy.

Also, when dealing with ships with strong AOE effects, getting more flexibility with turret placements by the sheer fact that you have more turrets work with can be a big help. It can also be a big help to help "spread out" incoming enemies if they don't decide to focus fire. (sometimes the AI does, sometimes the AI doesn't)

[Winge]

For Lightning Turrets, maybe make them have a trigger range that is 1000-2000 less than their damage range.  Then, you can place them a little bit away from the wormhole and still catch a decent group.  As for those three fighters...well, that's what Tractor Turrets are for, right? 

[TechSY730]

For Lightning Turrets, maybe make them have a trigger range that is 1000-2000 less than their damage range.  Then, you can place them a little bit away from the wormhole and still catch a decent group.  As for those three fighters...well, that's what Tractor Turrets are for, right? 

Maybe give them a "stagger fire" like electric shuttles and taser module have? This way, just because the first one may "waste" its shot, doesn't mean the others will.


EDIT: Wait, that is how they used to be, and that had its own set of balance problems...
Back to the drawing board. 

[TechSY730]

Not sure how exos should factor into this discussion. (mostly, whether they should or should not be a major consideration for their balance)
Turrets are a core game option. Exos are not. Exos are supposed to be a strain to "normal" options, which is why they come with opportunities to the player that are (supposed to be at least) much better than the "normal" options.
Plus, exos (or at least the per ship costs) seem to be due to a rebalance anyways, if previous topics are to be believed.

[Winge]

Maybe give them a "stagger fire" like electric shuttles and taser module have? This way, just because the first one may "waste" its shot, doesn't mean the others will.

Could work.  Maybe give them the tazer bonuses too?  OK, I'm being a little greedy .

[TechSY730]

Maybe give them a "stagger fire" like electric shuttles and taser module have? This way, just because the first one may "waste" its shot, doesn't mean the others will.

EDIT: Wait, that is how they used to be, and that had its own set of balance problems...
Back to the drawing board. 

Could work.  Maybe give them the tazer bonuses too?  OK, I'm being a little greedy .

Yea, that would be a bit greedy.

But there was a suggestion in mantis for an unlockable paralyser turret somewhere...

[Cinth]

Not sure how exos should factor into this discussion. (mostly, whether they should or should not be a major consideration for their balance)
Turrets are a core game option. Exos are not. Exos are supposed to be a strain to "normal" options, which is why they come with opportunities to the player that are (supposed to be at least) much better than the "normal" options.
Plus, exos (or at least the per ship costs) seem to be due to a rebalance anyways, if previous topics are to be believed.

They probably shouldn't. I was just saying why I don't use those turrets.