Talking Turrets

[nas1m]

This gets to the loot vapor-lock problem of another thread. It's hard to optimize when it seems like every slot can have just about every stat. I would be all for stats in general being more focused, so that you know when you look at one system you're only going to see some specific stats, which thus makes it easier to compare loot. I'd be all for trap skills just going on certain slots, in the greater context of making all skills only found in certain slots.

I would advocate this as well.

[Teal_Blue]

me too! 

[MrMud]

Just going to add my vote for nerfing sentries somehow.
Finished my first game on normal with sentries shooting for 6k at 80 range and with 10k hp. Missions basically consisted of whisling at max sensor range and then pressing spacebar a whole lot.

[Logorouge]

Just going to add my vote for nerfing sentries somehow.
Finished my first game on normal with sentries shooting for 6k at 80 range and with 10k hp. Missions basically consisted of whisling at max sensor range and then pressing spacebar a whole lot.

The sentry nerf update is already available, you just have to activate the beta in steam to get access to it. (Select game in steam, right-click, properties, Betas)

[MrMud]

Ah, great. I had checked the patchnotes for 1.002 but I didn't read 1.001

[keith.lamothe]

This gets to the loot vapor-lock problem of another thread. It's hard to optimize when it seems like every slot can have just about every stat. I would be all for stats in general being more focused, so that you know when you look at one system you're only going to see some specific stats, which thus makes it easier to compare loot. I'd be all for trap skills just going on certain slots, in the greater context of making all skills only found in certain slots.

Bear in mind that it's not true that just about every stat can go on every slot:

+Attack (not the +% one) is only for weapons
+Range is only for weapons
+Ammo is only for weapons
+Splash is only for weapons

+Shields can cross-over
+Regen can cross-over
+DR can cross-over

+%Attack can cross-over
+%Shields can cross-over
+%Propulsion can cross-over
+%Computer can cross-over
+%PowerGen can cross-over

+Stealth is only for propulsion
+Overload is only for propulsion
+TrapSkill can cross-over

+Sensors can cross-over
+Hacking is only for computers
+Virus is only for computers
+Sentries is only for computers
+Mines is only for computers

-PowerCostForRestOfSystem can cross-over

So of a grand total of 21 stats, 11 can cross-over and 10 cannot.

I certainly could make them all just never cross over, but that's going to MASSIVELY cut down on the variety of parts.  In fact I'll probably have to take out the extra effect from part "variants" (the ones that use a somewhat different image than the "base" type of the part) just because there won't be that many distinct effect types to go around.

And if we just reduce the number of cross-over stats (say, taking +%Propulsion and +TrapSkill out of the pool) that's going to make the others way more common overall.

So I actually don't mind removing the cross-over thing at all, and change this from being a sort of Torchlight-esque affair to something where the idea is that the parts are just fairly simple (more like bits of circuitry than enchanted vorpal broadswords), but I'm not sure if that's what folks actually want here.

[nas1m]

My Impression is that managing parts with many Crossover effects got a lot easier using the new customization, so i would definitely be opposed to removing them altogether. Cutting them down a bit and/or limiting them to fewer Part types might be worth a try, though...

[keith.lamothe]

Cutting them down a bit and/or limiting them to fewer Part types might be worth a try, though...

I'm not sure you understand the impact that would have, though.  The fewer cross-slot effects, the more heavily each will be used.  If I pull +TrapSkill and +%Propulsion from the crossover list, that means that, for example, you'll see +%Computer about 20% more often.

[PokerChen]

I'd vote for no change at this stage in the stats cross-over.

[keith.lamothe]

Yea, I've left "which stats can crossover" alone, but went ahead and suppressed the variant-caused effects and left the non-core modifiers to the prefixes and suffixes.

[Winge]

I'd vote for no change at this stage in the stats cross-over.

Second.  I think we would need more effects for each portion of the Exo (Weapons, Propulsion, Computer) in order for it to work well without being REALLY repetitive.

[FrostyThePyro]

This gets to the loot vapor-lock problem of another thread. It's hard to optimize when it seems like every slot can have just about every stat. I would be all for stats in general being more focused, so that you know when you look at one system you're only going to see some specific stats, which thus makes it easier to compare loot. I'd be all for trap skills just going on certain slots, in the greater context of making all skills only found in certain slots.

Bear in mind that it's not true that just about every stat can go on every slot:

+Attack (not the +% one) is only for weapons
+Range is only for weapons
+Ammo is only for weapons
+Splash is only for weapons

+Shields can cross-over
+Regen can cross-over
+DR can cross-over

+%Attack can cross-over
+%Shields can cross-over
+%Propulsion can cross-over
+%Computer can cross-over
+%PowerGen can cross-over

+Stealth is only for propulsion
+Overload is only for propulsion
+TrapSkill can cross-over

+Sensors can cross-over
+Hacking is only for computers
+Virus is only for computers
+Sentries is only for computers
+Mines is only for computers

-PowerCostForRestOfSystem can cross-over

So of a grand total of 21 stats, 11 can cross-over and 10 cannot.

I certainly could make them all just never cross over, but that's going to MASSIVELY cut down on the variety of parts.  In fact I'll probably have to take out the extra effect from part "variants" (the ones that use a somewhat different image than the "base" type of the part) just because there won't be that many distinct effect types to go around.

And if we just reduce the number of cross-over stats (say, taking +%Propulsion and +TrapSkill out of the pool) that's going to make the others way more common overall.

So I actually don't mind removing the cross-over thing at all, and change this from being a sort of Torchlight-esque affair to something where the idea is that the parts are just fairly simple (more like bits of circuitry than enchanted vorpal broadswords), but I'm not sure if that's what folks actually want here.

Though I am not convinced that crossover effects need to be removed, or even turned down, a possible compromise (if its decided it needs to be done) would be to have things that are crossing over be of a lesser quality.  for example trap skill on propulsion (its native environment)  would give +10, but trap skill on computer (a cross over environment) would give +5.

[keith.lamothe]

a possible compromise (if its decided it needs to be done) would be to have things that are crossing over be of a lesser quality.  for example trap skill on propulsion (its native environment)  would give +10, but trap skill on computer (a cross over environment) would give +5.

The difficulty there is that the item is basically gimping itself to take those stats cross-slot.  There's enough to consider when looking at a part without having to ask "does this have a cross-slot stat and thus is giving less overall oomph than parts that don't?", I think

[FrostyThePyro]

a possible compromise (if its decided it needs to be done) would be to have things that are crossing over be of a lesser quality.  for example trap skill on propulsion (its native environment)  would give +10, but trap skill on computer (a cross over environment) would give +5.

The difficulty there is that the item is basically gimping itself to take those stats cross-slot.  There's enough to consider when looking at a part without having to ask "does this have a cross-slot stat and thus is giving less overall oomph than parts that don't?", I think

I thought parts had some sort of internal point buy system going for them.  Wouldn't you be able to give the cross-slot bonuses a smaller point cost, leaving more points for the other bonuses on that part during generation?  cross slot will give lower values, but that oomph would then be available for the other stats on the item during its generation.

Admitidly my understanding of part generation is vauge at best.

[keith.lamothe]

a possible compromise (if its decided it needs to be done) would be to have things that are crossing over be of a lesser quality.  for example trap skill on propulsion (its native environment)  would give +10, but trap skill on computer (a cross over environment) would give +5.

The difficulty there is that the item is basically gimping itself to take those stats cross-slot.  There's enough to consider when looking at a part without having to ask "does this have a cross-slot stat and thus is giving less overall oomph than parts that don't?", I think

I thought parts had some sort of internal point buy system going for them.  Wouldn't you be able to give the cross-slot bonuses a smaller point cost, leaving more points for the other bonuses on that part during generation?  cross slot will give lower values, but that oomph would then be available for the other stats on the item during its generation.

Admitidly my understanding of part generation is vauge at best.

Sure, it could just get a "refund" on that part and put it in the other stats, but I hadn't thought you were saying that