Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: The Tac Laser  (Read 1215 times)

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
    • View Profile
The Tac Laser
« on: December 16, 2023, 09:59:00 AM »

The Tac Laser is dead. Long live the Tac Laser. There was a time when it was a very normal beam that didn't do anything particularly well, and that was ok because beams in general didn't do anything particularly well. But now every beam does something and the bog-standard Tac Laser feels like a relic of bygone years. Even in its heyday, no one wanted to put a Tac Laser in a Small Energy slot, you just kind of settled for it. The flux wasn't enough to make a difference on shields and when it did hit armor/hull, it was only a minor annoyance unless you could mass 4+ on a target. The old wisdom is that beams like the Tac Laser are "pressure weapons": they forced the enemy to raise shields or risk death by a thousand paper cuts. They are long-range, perfectly accurate, and cheap in OP and flux cost. Low-risk, low-reward. In a word: boring.

Other Beams in the game have a similar problem but all are more specialized than the Tac Laser. The Graviton deals Kinetic damage, can deflect missiles, and now causes shields to take more damage. The Ion Beam is a pure support beam dealing shut-down EMP damage and can pierce shields at high flux levels. The HIL deals HE damage and crushes armor. The IR Autolance can shred unshielded fighters, deal very good burst hull damage, and doesn't even bother wasting flux on shields. The Phase Lance is short-ranged but deals good hull damage and the Tachyon Lance is a long-range nuke. Then you have the point-defense beams: the PD Laser, LRPD, and Burst Lasers. The LRPD is the primary offender here because it has 80% of the range and 67% of the damage for 50% of the flux cost. It tracks better, as well. Its only downside is it costs 1 more OP. The one thing the Tac Laser has going for it is that in a PD role, it passes through missiles but that is faint praise.

In short, the Tac Laser has been passed by in the meta. It just doesn't offer anything above and beyond what other beams can do and they're not competitive even in the pretty milquetoast Small Energy slot. To put it another way, how many of you use Tac Lasers on Centurion or Hammerhead Hybrid slots? How many Tac Lasers go on your Scarabs or Medusa's? Do you put Tac Lasers on Furies or Auroras? When is having just a single Tac Laser worth firing at range to keep an enemy's shields up (and worth giving up your own 0-flux boost)?

What is the best use-case for a Tac Laser? A long-range Eagle Build? Contributing to an all-or-none, Disco Ball Paragon build? You used to be able to use Tac Lasers in an IPDAI + Advanced Turret Gyros combination on larger ships but IPDAI now takes an S-mod. Even then, it wasn't that great.

So what to do with them? Since every other beam does something now, I don't see why the Tac Laser shouldn't either. (As an aside, I kind of hate that the IR Autolance exists because that style of beam mechanic would have been very good for the Tac Laser. Something a bit more opportunistic, a little stronger against hull, but still generally useful.) Without changing the actual mechanic of the beam, though, how do you incentivize shooting one of these at an enemy? How do you bump up the supportive fire role it has?

Suggestion 1: Ramping Damage

My first immediate thought was to ramp up the damage on armor/hull the longer the beam stays on target. If you played Starcraft 2, you know about the Protoss Void Ray. It doesn't deal a lot of damage at first, but if it can stay on one target long enough, it has three stages of damage that get increasingly more devastating. I'm not saying do anything to that extreme for the Tac Laser but what if it doubled its damage against armor/hull (but not shields!) over a few seconds of firing on one target?

For example, a Tac Laser does 75 DPS (though only half that for the armor calculation), but as soon as it contacts armor or hull, it increases 5% per tick up to a full 100%. IIRC, beam damage occurs ~10x a second, so it would take 2 seconds to get to full damage. Since all it takes is a shield flicker or stray fighter to get in the way of the beam, it has the potential to reset fairly often, but getting the full damage shouldn't take too long, either.

Suggestion 2: Angry Flashlights

I'm also a fan of Warhammer 40k and Imperial Guard Lasguns are sometimes called "angry flashlights." They are notoriously underpowered at the individual level but when you get 10,000 Guardsmen all firing at the same thing?  ;D

If you can get multiple Tac Lasers pointed in the same general vicinity on a ship's armor (like within 10 su), they amplify all damage to that armor cell by a small percentage (3%). This effect is multiplied by 5 for other Tac Lasers. So, in the case of an Eagle with 3 Tac Lasers in the small slots, they add 9% to all weapons hitting that armor cell but add 45% for the Tac Lasers themselves (~109 DPS each). The upper limit is 5 instances (so +15%/75% for the Tac Lasers). The amplifying effect has no effect on shields.

Suggestion 3: "Pulse" Laser

I experimented with making the Tac Laser "pulse", but do more damage (this would cause confusion with the Pulse Laser, I know). The Tac Laser stays at 75 DPS/60 Flux but has a .3 second duration with a .15 second chargedown. The actual beam DPS is 213 (Burst Laser is 350, for reference) and I improved its beam speed to 6500 (about twice as fast but not instant). Interestingly, it's terrible once you add range upgrades because the beam spends most of its time traveling and deals diminished damage. Seeing these things strobe everywhere might cause issues to our epileptic friends, though! It's very effective against unshielded frigates and fighters. My impression playtesting this is that it's too strong and perhaps too busy, visually, but it is working "within the framework" without any extra gimmicks. It does step on the toes of the IR Autolance to some degree.

Overall

I'm not convinced any of the above are great and I'd love to hear other ideas. Maybe the Tac Laser should stay as a ho-hum pressure weapon because if it ain't broke, don't fix it but I do know I rarely use them currently. I'd like to have a reason to.
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2023, 10:03:08 AM »

The purpose of the tac laser is to be the cheapest, smallest weapon that reliably forces AI to raise shields (mostly out of poor decision making than actual pressure). This IS a very valuable effect, in fact, but an argument can be made that cheesing AI shouldn't be the primary use case for a weapon.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2023, 10:39:02 AM »

The best way to buff Tac Laser is make it track and extend as fast as a PD laser.  Tactical Lasers are surprisingly slow and are unsuited for PD even with IPDAI.  They need Advanced Turret Gyros but even then, they still seem to have problems tracking fast-moving hostiles.  Mining Lasers are similarly as slow but not quite as slow as Tac Lasers, but at least Mining Lasers are useful as a cheap AI hint to force missile dumps and assault weapons to truly auto-fire.

Making Tac Laser as fast as a PD laser does not mean it has to be PD.  Some may want a weapon that is not distracted by missiles or affected negatively by being a PD weapon (ship AI behaving badly with all PD loadout, Paragon ATC not working fully on PD weapons, etc.)


For me, the best use case for Tac Lasers is the same as Graviton Beam - 600 range hard-flux weapon from High Scatter Amplifier (since all other hard flux small energy weapons are 500 range).  Unfortunately, burst PDs (with s-mod XMags) are better beams for hard-flux assault despite less range.  No, it is not optimal, and I do not use that option very often, and sometimes I use it only because I have nothing better to use (too early to have unlimited resources).

I have a hard time justifying using normal Graviton Beams once I have access to unlimited IR Autolances.  I have tried both, and nearly every time, I get better results from autolance than with Graviton Beam, and the only time I use Graviton Beams after I get autolance is as an ultra-efficient hard flux weapon via HSA hullmod.
Logged

eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2023, 03:00:11 PM »

The best way to buff Tac Laser is make it track and extend as fast as a PD laser.  Tactical Lasers are surprisingly slow and are unsuited for PD even with IPDAI.  They need Advanced Turret Gyros but even then, they still seem to have problems tracking fast-moving hostiles.  Mining Lasers are similarly as slow but not quite as slow as Tac Lasers, but at least Mining Lasers are useful as a cheap AI hint to force missile dumps and assault weapons to truly auto-fire.

Making Tac Laser as fast as a PD laser does not mean it has to be PD.  Some may want a weapon that is not distracted by missiles or affected negatively by being a PD weapon (ship AI behaving badly with all PD loadout, Paragon ATC not working fully on PD weapons, etc.)


For me, the best use case for Tac Lasers is the same as Graviton Beam - 600 range hard-flux weapon from High Scatter Amplifier (since all other hard flux small energy weapons are 500 range).  Unfortunately, burst PDs (with s-mod XMags) are better beams for hard-flux assault despite less range.  No, it is not optimal, and I do not use that option very often, and sometimes I use it only because I have nothing better to use (too early to have unlimited resources).

I have a hard time justifying using normal Graviton Beams once I have access to unlimited IR Autolances.  I have tried both, and nearly every time, I get better results from autolance than with Graviton Beam, and the only time I use Graviton Beams after I get autolance is as an ultra-efficient hard flux weapon via HSA hullmod.
Yep a buff to their deployment speed and turning speed would be very nice so they can be used as useful anti fighter PD.

Currently the best use I've found on them is Scarabs. I use two builds. The first is a max range soft flux build, primarily for PD and distraction purposes. The second is a max range hard flux build for actual combat. If I remember correctly the ranges for both builds are 1650 and 825 respectively. The long-range hard flux build tends to be safer than using hard flux burst PD s-mod ex mags, as the latter only has around 500 range, I forget exactly how much.

As for Graviton vs Autolance. Graviton for heavy armor, Autolance for light armor. The reason for this is that heavy armor, even when stripped, mitigates too much of the Autolance's damage. At which point even though Graviton is still doing less hull damage, the damage is close enough that the Graviton's bonus damage to shields becomes more relevant leading to faster kill times.
Given the armor required to make the Autolance ineffective is right around Dominator levels, 1500, the IR Autolance is typically a better generalist pick unless you know in advance that you will be facing capital spam, or very heavy armor.
Logged

Phenir

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2023, 07:56:56 PM »

One game I ran 8 glimmers, in 2 squads of 4, to cap points and hunt down enemy stragglers. They used 4 tac lasers + graviton beam and ripped apart anything below cruisers (and even cruisers had trouble with them thanks to range and speed, it just took forever for the glimmers to kill them). Thanks to the high range from the lasers, they didn't constantly get in the way of bigger ships once they joined the blob, unlike how a short range build like SO blaster might and obviously could fight much longer and more safely than that build.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2798
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2023, 03:21:31 AM »

One extra point, is that firing a Tac Laser against an enemy can easily be a net negative: if you spend more weapon flux than shield flux generated on target (as absolute value or percentage). You can even engineer a scenario in which firing tac lasers is what loses you a fight as opposed to just disabling them. I don't think AI considers this, and Tacs are pretty much AI-only weapons (player has better things to do).
« Last Edit: December 22, 2023, 03:24:18 AM by TaLaR »
Logged

RASTIL

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2023, 05:35:38 AM »

First time i was reffiting a ship in this game was when i put 3 tac lasers and a graviton on a wolf. Let's say after seeing this "beast" be unable to raise enemy flux above 1 % fighting pirates it left permament distate for both of those systems. I feel like any sniping energy below large is largely useless, who in their right mind woudl use a long-range fury or aurora when they ain't got no large slot for this to be actually any kind of a threat.

I just treat tac laser existance like energy counterparts to mortar and heavy mortar, weapons for pirates so the player has a fighting chance in early game.
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2023, 08:11:20 AM »

One extra point, is that firing a Tac Laser against an enemy can easily be a net negative: if you spend more weapon flux than shield flux generated on target (as absolute value or percentage).
I can't believe I keep hearing this argument, from experienced players, of all people. You don't compare flux generated by firing with flux generated by shielding. The enemy also has weapons, and denying them flux to fire those can be highly beneficial even if the flux/damage ration is "tehnically" bad for you.
Consider a very straighforward example. You have a tac laser, enemy has an autocannon and a 0.4 shield. Would you choose to fire your tac laser into the shield and "lose" flux, or let them spend all of their flux on dumping much more efficient kinetics into your shield?
Logged

Nettle

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • supplying bad takes
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2023, 08:26:51 AM »

You have a tac laser, enemy has an autocannon and a 0.4 shield. Would you choose to fire your tac laser into the shield and "lose" flux, or let them spend all of their flux on dumping much more efficient kinetics into your shield?

This makes sense, but aren't you still generating more total flux, considering you also probably have other weapons to fire beside said tac laser, and they would get better value per unit of flux?
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2798
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2023, 08:43:18 AM »

One extra point, is that firing a Tac Laser against an enemy can easily be a net negative: if you spend more weapon flux than shield flux generated on target (as absolute value or percentage).
I can't believe I keep hearing this argument, from experienced players, of all people. You don't compare flux generated by firing with flux generated by shielding. The enemy also has weapons, and denying them flux to fire those can be highly beneficial even if the flux/damage ration is "tehnically" bad for you.
Consider a very straighforward example. You have a tac laser, enemy has an autocannon and a 0.4 shield. Would you choose to fire your tac laser into the shield and "lose" flux, or let them spend all of their flux on dumping much more efficient kinetics into your shield?

You can engineer a case for either outcome. If enemy has enough unused soft flux (due to shield up and not enough long ranged weapons) to neutralize tac lasers, firing tacs does literally nothing except costing you flux. Or both your and enemy's shields are extremely efficient (Radiant vs Radiant). Slightly winning in hard flux (assuming enemy doesn't have unused soft flux when firing) at high soft flux cost is probably not worthwhile. Of course you wouldn't put tacs on a Radiant, but whatever.
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1331
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2023, 01:10:40 PM »

You can engineer a case for either outcome.
Certainly. My point is, saying "this weapon is flux-negative" isn't a meaningful argument against it, because you very often still want to fire flux-negative weapons into enemies.
This makes sense, but aren't you still generating more total flux, considering you also probably have other weapons to fire beside said tac laser, and they would get better value per unit of flux?
They might get better value eventually, and in the meantime enemy weapons will getter even better value on you instead.
Logged

Rusty Edge

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2023, 03:14:20 PM »

Tactical lasers are supposed to punish fast, lightly armored opponents for dropping their shields, rather than dealing meaningful flux damage. That's what kinetics are for.

Case in point, trying to take down something slippery, like an omen. A wolf can keep 3 tac lasers on an omen, while easily staying out of range of the Omen's Emp emitters, meanwhile, you can have any other frigate equipped with kinetics or energy weapons to build up hard flux. The omen has to take damage any time the omen wants to withdraw and drop shields.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2023, 04:16:37 PM »

I wonder- would it be reasonable to change the tactical laser to HE, make it match the HIL's typing?

I think that would probably be a positive change, overall, but I'm not sure.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Nettle

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • supplying bad takes
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #13 on: December 22, 2023, 06:49:22 PM »

I wonder- would it be reasonable to change the tactical laser to HE, make it match the HIL's typing?

I think that would probably be a positive change, overall, but I'm not sure.

All shieldless fighters just cried out in agony.
Logged

Cegorach

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: The Tac Laser
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2023, 02:52:25 AM »

What about making the tactical laser the armour equivalent of the gravy beam?  Explain it as the precision of the weapon allowing it to target already damaged regions, and pry open the cracks in armour from previous hits.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2