Let's Discuss Augments

[The_one_and_only 97]

8 hours ago, ghost-guns said:

I just got the heat immunity augment in a container... but it's only for mammoth.

Same, I just got that 2 days ago

[Blutaar 1,904]

23 hours ago, ghost-guns said:

I just got the heat immunity augment in a container... but it's only for mammoth.

still useful though, will definitely help you at defending

[Mirzaubaidullah 52]

23 hours ago, ghost-guns said:

I just got the heat immunity augment in a container... but it's only for mammoth.

For some reason containers keep giving me hull aug for wasp that I never use; heat resistance & heat Immunity.

[Mirzaubaidullah 52]

LET me exchange this for 100 double armor

Edited December 31, 2020 by Mirzaubaidullah

[wolverine848 13,097]

On 12/29/2020 at 9:03 AM, BloodPressure said:

still useful though, will definitely help you at defending

Put Vulcan on it with Incendiary Band.  They get too close and zap them...

[Blutaar 1,904]

6 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Put Vulcan on it with Incendiary Band.  They get too close and zap them...

I own both Incendiary Band and Heat-Immunity for Hunter, but I refuse to play with it. Only when my team is at a horrendous disadvantage and there is no other way to compensate I may consider using it. 

[alkyng 3,080]

I think guys the logical balance for Mortar Magnum is to disable the splash damage from the augment, so it will be 

Lay mines

Splash damage removed

I know that will make it something UP, as the Magnum is highly dependent in splash damage. But this will make the player think a lot before buying this Augment, not the -15% nerf from just the maximum damage that made it instead of 2330 to 2000, not that much.

I think this (my suggestion) is what every Augment should to be, they shouldn't be balanced, they should be weaker than the original turret. Because if the player need a new thing in his turret or a change in something, he should bear the cost of the change, so his turret will be something weak but he will get what he want (lay mines). But what happened isn't like what I said and isn't even to be balanced equaled to the turret, but what happened is they made them more OP.

This was my criticize about "Alteration" but I know could understand when I read the cost of EMP Gauss is 47$

In example with my suggestion the logical nerf for EMP Gauss is to be

Applying EMP

Splash damage removed

Damage -50%

Not what they did that made it exploit the OP "unreasonable" splash damage in Gauss more than 100% by applying the EMP to everyone and giving it -50% reload, just for -25% in damage. 

So TL:DR Augments should be weaker than the original turret incase the change you want.

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

56 minutes ago, asem.harbi said:

I think guys the logical balance for Mortar Magnum is to disable the splash damage from the augment, so it will be 

Lay mines

Splash damage removed

I know that will make it something UP, as the Magnum is highly dependent in splash damage. But this will make the player think a lot before buying this Augment, not the -15% nerf from just the maximum damage that made it instead of 2330 to 2000, not that much.

I think this (my suggestion) is what every Augment should to be, they shouldn't be balanced, they should be weaker than the original turret. Because if the player need a new thing in his turret or a change in something, he should bear the cost of the change, so his turret will be something weak but he will get what he want (lay mines). But what happened isn't like what I said and isn't even to be balanced equaled to the turret, but what happened is they made them more OP.

 

Disabling the splash on a vertical Magnum will be bad. If you're disabling splash damage, then the mines should stay forever. 

 

A better nerf would be to have the direct damage significantly reduced. Maximum and minimum damage -40%.

[Tidebreaker 1,669]

There's a much simpler solution that you haven't considered - making these special abilities chance based, like Smoky's critical hits. This would make it impossible to chain these indefinitely. In that way, something like EM Salvo and Mortar instantly become much more tolerable.

[wolverine848 13,097]

45 minutes ago, TheCongoSpider said:

Disabling the splash on a vertical Magnum will be bad. If you're disabling splash damage, then the mines should stay forever. 

Why?  They are choosing to use that augment to lay mines.  They actually want to miss - is way, way more effective.

And it makes no sense at all to have a high-explosive (splash) shell lay a mine.  Just like it makes no sense at all for Gauss EMP to have splash.  It's an EMP shell, not a HE shell.  Can't have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too.

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

1 hour ago, wolverine848 said:

Why?  They are choosing to use that augment to lay mines.  They actually want to miss - is way, way more effective.

I'm looking at it from a practical perspective. Assuming they miss, their only source of damage goes away in 30 seconds, assuming they haven't died before that time and then the mine disappears. They will barely be getting much score if any.

 

1 hour ago, wolverine848 said:

And it makes no sense at all to have a high-explosive (splash) shell lay a mine.  Just like it makes no sense at all for Gauss EMP to have splash.  It's an EMP shell, not a HE shell.  Can't have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too.

 A lot of things don't make sense, from a smaller extent like Scout Railgun not having lower impact force, to a larger more realistic extent with your example of EMP Gauss having an EMP shell and splash damage at the same time. 

 

It's a game, where balance between turrets/alterations takes precedence over extreme realism. 

 

[alkyng 3,080]

29 minutes ago, TheCongoSpider said:

I'm looking at it from a practical perspective. Assuming they miss, their only source of damage goes away in 30 seconds, assuming they haven't died before that time and then the mine disappears. They will barely be getting much score if any.

Yes you're right that will make Mortar underpowered.

But you missed my point that I see every Augment should to be weaker than the original turret, so if someone really need a certain change in his turret, he should bear the cost of change (missing an important character).

So my suggestion will make the player before buy Mortar (or any Augment) think twice before purchasing. But what happened now the Augments aren't a secondary thing as I suggest, but they're primary and important for every turret. Like stock Twins isn't a playable tbh, as it has the splash damage.

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

4 minutes ago, asem.harbi said:

Yes you're right that will make Mortar underpowered.

But you missed my point that I see every Augment should to be weaker than the original turret, so if someone really need a certain change in his turret, he should bear the cost of change (missing an important character).

So my suggestion will make the player before buy Mortar (or any Augment) think twice before purchasing. But what happened now the Augments aren't a secondary thing as I suggest, but they're primary and important for every turret. Like stock Twins isn't a playable tbh, as it has the splash damage.

Twins and vulcan are the only 2 turrets that you are forced to buy the alt to stop self damage.

Seems a bit unfair really, but then again the devs don't do fair, only cash.

[wolverine848 13,097]

1 hour ago, TheCongoSpider said:

I'm looking at it from a practical perspective. Assuming they miss, their only source of damage goes away in 30 seconds, assuming they haven't died before that time and then the mine disappears. They will barely be getting much score if any.

They should be choosing the augment for specific reasons.  Laying a mine that does 3k damage and that 95% of the player base does not protect against is one of them.

It should be a lot weaker in one dimension to get a unique ability (laying mines in enemy base) added to the game.

Does not have to be a 1:1 trade off - again - it's optional.  So no splash and maybe the mines last 40 seconds.  Definitely not permanent since these magnums often stay safely in their base for this sole purpose.

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

31 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

They should be choosing the augment for specific reasons.  Laying a mine that does 3k damage and that 95% of the player base does not protect against is one of them.

It should be a lot weaker in one dimension to get a unique ability (laying mines in enemy base) added to the game.

Does not have to be a 1:1 trade off - again - it's optional.  So no splash and maybe the mines last 40 seconds.  Definitely not permanent since these magnums often stay safely in their base for this sole purpose.

A mine does 1,800 damage on average. That's 900 damage with DA. 

 

I do agree Mortar it should be weaker. But disabling the splash damage will simply kill it score-wise. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

7 hours ago, TheCongoSpider said:

A mine does 1,800 damage on average. That's 900 damage with DA. 

 

I do agree Mortar it should be weaker. But disabling the splash damage will simply kill it score-wise. 

LOL... never does 900 to me - always does a LOT more than that.

As for score... too bad - they would not be selecting it for that.   Augments like shock-freeze and Smoky Assault rounds are definitely trading off score for a tactical advantage.

Edited January 17, 2021 by wolverine848

[OUTAMYWAY 48]

When using the Mortar upgrade for Magnum, does a placed mine count as Magnum damage or Mine damage? I've just realised that might be quite important when protection modules are factored in.

Edited January 18, 2021 by OUTAMYWAY

[Tokamak 1,021]

9 minutes ago, OUTAMYWAY said:

When using the Mortar upgrade for Magnum, does a placed mine count as Magnum damage or Mine damage? I've just realised that might be quite important when protection modules are factored in.

It is a mine consequently mine damage, only the spider protection module can protect you from it.

[OUTAMYWAY 48]

On 1/16/2021 at 5:57 PM, TheCongoSpider said:

A lot of things don't make sense, from a smaller extent like Scout Railgun not having lower impact force, to a larger more realistic extent with your example of EMP Gauss having an EMP shell and splash damage at the same time. 

 

No but the reason most augments make sense is because they have drawbacks. 

The arguments for stopping splash on mortar (in my experience) is to reduce its effect when shooting blind to long ranges, which cannot be predicted well by the other team. The counter to such an argument is that Magnum players need that damage to 'walk' their shots onto stationary targets. Reducing splash damage might be called for and the damage reduction is right.

EMP salvo however, just breaks the game. It  makes it extremely difficult to even attempt fighting back past mid-ranges and removing arcade splash damage is barely even trying to balance it. Its is/ was (given as im not sure exactly how you might get it now) a premium augment that really only justified its obscene effectiveness  by the price tag, which only helps reduce the scale of the issue. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

11 minutes ago, OUTAMYWAY said:

No but the reason most augments make sense is because they have drawbacks. 

The arguments for stopping splash on mortar (in my experience) is to reduce its effect when shooting blind to long ranges, which cannot be predicted well by the other team. The counter to such an argument is that Magnum players need that damage to 'walk' their shots onto stationary targets. Reducing splash damage might be called for and the damage reduction is right.

EMP salvo however, just breaks the game. It  makes it extremely difficult to even attempt fighting back past mid-ranges and removing arcade splash damage is barely even trying to balance it. Its is/ was (given as im not sure exactly how you might get it now) a premium augment that really only justified its obscene effectiveness  by the price tag, which only helps reduce the scale of the issue. 

Agreed.

EMP salvo is by far the most broken of all the augments.

And price tag should in no way justify that monstrosity.  Staying in a battle against those ridiculous augments is futile.  I often just exit the battle.

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

On 9/23/2016 at 8:34 AM, Maf said:

Unless you have crystals to waste, don't buy them now. It's really likely that they will be nerfed or otherwise changed in the near future

Well this aged well.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Tanker-Arthur

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

Can anyone explain to me why the developers decided to change Alterations into Augments?

I mean, Alterations were perfectly fine, they were balanced (for the most part), and if you didn't like the gameplay effects of some Alterations, you could always go back to the stock turret.

And for the Alterations that were unbalanced, they quickly received updates to make them more in line with the rest of the game's balance. Thus, the game was interesting and fun to play, cause you got to try out different aspects of the turret you liked, but at the same time it wasn't frustrating if you were going up against someone with an overpowered Augment (Alteration), and especially if the Augment is buyer-only.


Also, Alterations were much cheaper than today's Augments. It was nice cause non-buyers could easily afford them. Also, since they weren't meant for "overall improving your turret", it was fine wasting a load of crystals (but not too many crystals) on something that can only help you in certain situations, but hinder you in others.

Honestly, the developers wasted 3 years of their time when they converted the Alterations into Augments. Spent three years balancing everything just to throw all that work and effort out the window one day.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Tanker-Arthur

[Tokamak 1,021]

1 hour ago, Tanker-Arthur said:

Can anyone explain to me why the developers decided to change Alterations into Augments?

Money mainly.

when you turn something of low value/appeal into added power you create a new market/need that certain players crave for. When buyers and legends have all the drones they want and are maxed up, with augments they cans still get additional power... and tanki more $.

The other way to make $ would be to add more hulls that create diversity and new game play with relatively less problems that pure power upgrade (like augments and drones), but it seems a few critics do not like that either 

[The_Voltage 178]

3 hours ago, Tanker-Arthur said:

Honestly, the developers wasted 3 years of their time when they converted the Alterations into Augments. Spent three years balancing everything just to throw all that work and effort out the window one day.

Because no one need most of them. With the transformation to Augments they upgrade some of them by delete weaknesses. And those alts become playable. And profit, of course)

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

1 hour ago, Tokamak said:

Money mainly.

when you turn something of low value/appeal into added power you create a new market/need that certain players crave for. When buyers and legends have all the drones they want and are maxed up, with augments they cans still get additional power... and tanki more $.

Ohhhhhhhhh.

1 hour ago, Tokamak said:

When buyers and legends have all the drones they want and are maxed up, with augments they cans still get additional power... and tanki more $.

To be honest, the best solution would've been to add more turrets. Buyers would spend money to max the turret out quick, and Legends would also max it quickly due to the stockpile of crystals they have after not buying anything for a period of time. I know that there isn't much leniency for a new turret to be released rapidly, but around 1 or 2 per year should do.

Spoiler

And yeah, it doesn't count as "more power", but hey, bragging to someone that you unlocked every M3 turret is a pretty satisfying thing to do.
And if new upgrades are needed, I don't think changing something that's been in the game for 3 years (Alterations in this case) is viable, cause for three years, everyone got used to Alterations being balanced modifications to existing turrets, not upgrades. Things that have been in the game for a long time should only be changed if it was causing problems to the game and it's playerbase is annoyed by such problems.

 

1 hour ago, Tokamak said:

The other way to make $ would be to add more hulls that create diversity.............. but it seems a few critics do not like that either 

Yeah, to be honest, there isn't much room for new hulls. Also.....I would like to point out that some of the overdrives would've been dope ideas for new turrets. We could have a stunning turret (Hunter), a turret specialized for armor-piercing (Hornet), and/or a turret that shoots freezing icicles (Crusader).

Well, it looks like Tesla will have Ares' ball lightning, so that's cool.

Just now, The_Voltage said:

Because no one need most of them. With the transformation to Augments they upgrade some of them by delete weaknesses. And those alts become playable. And profit, of course)

I feel like the reason Alterations were added was to provide a cheaper alternative to buying a new turret.

Spoiler

As well as provide new and varying gameplay during the periods between actual new turrets were released.

For example, rather than buying Twins and having to upgrade it, you can simply buy the Plasma-Torch alteration for Ricochet and it'll be a lot cheaper (before April 2020 that is). The alteration (aka "New Turret) would upgrade alongside the stock version of Ricochet, saving you many, many crystals.

But you do have a point. Some people don't buy alterations cause they already have all their gameplay niches filled, or they're just comfortable using the turret's stock version.