D'Blee Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 I've not ever seen this brought up, but a couple of things in CC make turrets extremely attractive, even when compared to fortresses; 1) Ion Accu-Accelerators. This is a brutal, nasty tech. And much more effective than Heated Shot, because of its use vs. ground units. 2) A single repeater is enough to bring a turret up to full power. This is markedly different from AoK, where you often needed several troops in a single turret to make it really nasty and that bit heavily into your pop count. Four repeaters in advanced turrets can reap vast numbers of anything bar pummels, cannon and ACs. Even assault mechs will take a nasty pounding from such a barrage. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simwiz2 Posted June 18, 2002 Share Posted June 18, 2002 Definately agreed. Shielded advanced turrets behind walls (to protect from pummels) are almost unassailable except by cannon and air cruiser. I ususally put 3 repeaters in my turrets, AFAIK that is what is needed to get 4 lasers shooting out, though i could be wrong. Turrets with AA turrets and defended by cannons and grenade troopers (against cannons) and a few fighters (against air cruisers) can provide a Last Stand and even turn the tide of a game if your opponent loses too many units charging the turrets. A bit OT but has anyone noticed that when you have a heavily garrisoned fortress, it shoots out about 20 lasers but only a few of them actually hit the target and the other 16 or so seem to miss wildly. Is this just a graphic mess-up or are those 16 shots really being wasted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted June 19, 2002 Share Posted June 19, 2002 I think it's the former (graphically it looks like it's not hitting but in reality it is). I guess they figured a Fortress would fire a barrage of blasts in a general area in order to hit a target. Makes sense if the target is moving, but looks kinda silly if the target is just sitting there. Of course, the barrage attack would be better if it had the chance to damage multiple units (which would give people another incentive to build fortresses). Firing a barrage of lasers into a pack of units and damaging only one (especially when most of the blasts go elsewhere) just seems silly. Personally, I'd prefer they either 1) make the barrage able to hit multiple units (with a % to hit anything in the area, possibly even friendly units) or 2) perhaps switch the graphic of the attack to the style of the lasers used by the CC decimators (would look cooler in my opinion, giving a solid beam from the fortress to the target instead of the short beams it currently uses). Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted June 19, 2002 Share Posted June 19, 2002 No, when forts and turrets shoot, only the lasers that hit hurt. The SWGB turrets are much better than their counterparts in AoK but thats because ES wanted to emphasize castles in the medevial times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Blee Posted June 19, 2002 Author Share Posted June 19, 2002 Simwiz: you actually do only need a single repeater in an advanced turret to get 4 shots at a time. You may need to have your repeaters FU'd though, I don't recall. Certainly upgrades do make a difference to garrison strength; the formula for garrison firepower includes fire rate among other things, which means that even a +1 attack can make a difference to garrison firepower for the rapidly firing repeater trooper. As I said, I don't recall whether or not this makes a difference for turrets, but if you play around with a fortress then you will quickly see the difference. Sithmaster: good points, as usual. Since the turret upgrades aren't all that ore-intensive (with the exception of the rarely-purchased Adv. AA upgrade), I wonder if turrets might be a better bet for defence than fortresses? Slightly less resilient, much cheaper, build faster, shot-for-shot more powerful than fortresses, need fewer garrisoned troops to bring them up to full power, more accurate... could it be that fortresses are only worth building to get upgrades and UUs? (Yes, I know they combine air and ground attacks. Two turrets and an AA turret are still cheaper than a fortress though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted June 19, 2002 Share Posted June 19, 2002 .I see turrets as a more powerful offensive weapon now whereas the fortress is mainly used for defense. Also, the fort is the everything building (UU, ground attack, aa attack, cannon, bounties, aircruiser, massive hp, high garrison rate). Turrets are more powerful than forts (both regular and aa) because they are specialized. Also, in only takes one repeater to max out a turret because FU turret+FU repeater=regular turret+ regular repeater. The formula is done so that the sum of the garrisoned units attack per shot from turret adds one more shot for every turret attack strength more than that of the turret. Its easier than it sounds:) . Sithmaster: good points, as usual Yay! Im becoming famous (and in a good way). You just made my day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted June 20, 2002 Share Posted June 20, 2002 Originally posted by Sithmaster_821 No, when forts and turrets shoot, only the lasers that hit hurt. In this case, I definitely think they should allow the scattered shots a random chance to his any unit in the vicinity. Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted June 20, 2002 Share Posted June 20, 2002 Kryllith, the lasers do hurt things they aren't aiming at. But it only does one damage per shot to keep the buildings balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.