Auto defense devices should be treated as weapons for slots.

[PM]

While working on automated versions of some weapons for one of my mods, I noticed there is nothing stopping ships with many non-weapon slots, such as the EI500, from equipping multiple auto defense devices and have them shoot down targets automatically. (Yes, auto defense devices stack.) Suppose the ICX (which is similar to an omni turbolaser) could attack enemies instead of (or in addition to) missiles only. Imagine an EI500 equipping about three or four ICX devices. If those ICX weapons can aim at enemies, the example EI500 can outgun the Wolfen (which cannot equip as many non-weapon devices), because the EI500 would be firing multiple (auto defense) weapons simultaneously.

Auto defense devices should use a weapon slot (instead of a non-weapon slot) when installed. In addition, only one such device installed should be allowed, much like launchers, to prevent stacking. (At least until a possible weapons overhaul that can allow players to fire multiple primary weapons like NPC capital ships.)

[Aury]

This breaks vanilla balance in so many ways for the sake of mods. This is the wrong way to go about it.

You are suggesting two things:
1) they should take weapon slots
2) you should only have one at a time

1- this should instead be fixed by having what type of slot it occupies specified in the itemtype element instead of if it has a weapon element or not.
2- this is a HORRIBLE idea to have it hard-coded. Again, this should be specifiable in the xml if it should stack or not. And in fact, as an interim measure, you can simply use onInstall to disable/uninstall any other such devices. We have the script abilities to do it.

[Ttech]

I don't think they should be weapons, you cannot control them so having them in the slots means you loose a weapon that isn't really more then a patch on the ship.

[PM]

(To Wolfy) I do not care how it gets fixed. Letting the modder specify the type of slot an auto defense device takes is a better idea. Does 1.05 let the modder specify which slot an auto defense device takes, or is it hardcored to non-weapon slot? If the latter, once (otherwise reasonably balanced) mods that feature defense devices that target ships appear, it is only a matter of time before the EI500 can outgun the Wolfen by equipping some. Auto defense devices that are installed in non-weapon slots and shoot at enemy ships is a loophole for an EI500 to equip more weapons, and one that fires independently from other weapons.

(To Ttech) Who cares if you cannot control the devices, as long as they shoot down the targets they were designed to fire at?

[Prophet]

Perhaps some code in the onInstall event to check if a turret/autoDefense device is already installed.
Maybe we need an attribute like the enhancers have to prevent stacking?

[Aury]

nah, you can do it in script Prophet

[alterecco]

Clearly ICX devices are weapon mounts..... I fail to see the discussion. If vanilla does not treat them as so, then it is a bug! If that leads to some sort of loss of balance, then perhaps we should request a third type of slot... a passive defense slot?.

[Aury]

Personally, I think scripted attribute-based control over slots would be best

[PM]

The problem with "you can prevent abuse with script" is not every modder will do this, and players likely include an assorted collection of mods from different authors. Some less experienced modders may perform the bare minimum to get their device working, but may not include safeguards against abuse if they are not obvious or simple enough to include.

[alterecco]

Scripted control always nice, but from the perspective of the engine, it is not what lends itself to the greatest immediacy.

[Aury]

Oh well then, they don't get a "balance approved" label - and could very well get dumped in godmod if OP

[alterecco]

It is more a question of making the xml sane. There is no doubt that ppl prefer xml to tscript. If it is possible to define something in xml without becoming too verbose it is definitely an advantage.

[Atarlost]

Clearly ICX devices are weapon mounts..... I fail to see the discussion. If vanilla does not treat them as so, then it is a bug! If that leads to some sort of loss of balance, then perhaps we should request a third type of slot... a passive defense slot?.

This is a very deliberate balance choice. For autodefense devices to be weapons would make them unmountable on the freighter and too easy to mount on the Wolfen. This would completely trash the balance between playerships.

[Prophet]

Hence the suggestion that they remain misc devices but are limited to 1 installed at a time.

[george moromisato]

My sense of the conversation is that there is consensus on the following:

1. AutoDefense devices in the vanilla game, which target missiles, should remain misc devices.
2. If we were to add AutoDefense devices that target ships, then they essentially become weapons, and that would unbalance the game.
3. Also, AutoDefense devices that target ships should probably not be allowed to stack.
4. We can solve #2 and #3 by adding XML control for whether a device is treated as a weapon and for whether it is allowed to stack. Specific devices would trade-off certain capabilities (target ships) in exchange for certain limits (treated as weapons, can't stack).

[I don't think there is consensus on whether or not vanilla AutoDefense devices should stack. My instinct tells me to leave them alone--I don't think anyone feels that multiple missile-targeting AutoDefense devices have benefits that outweight their use of a slot.]

If this sounds like consensus, can someone write up a ticket for #4?