From the Depths - EMP: How to (but really, why?)

[@GMODISM]

I don't think EMP should be banned, it's fun and a cool mechanic! I did find this video very useful however, I didn't know the epic use of small EMP charges to deal with small blocks and detection so that was very insightful. One thing I'd like to add however is that rubber seems far more useful in game compaired to how the stats look, I usually rubber EMP insulate stuff and EMP is extremely rarely a problem on those crafts. Anyways, good vid!

[@OhmIsFutile]

Thanks!

[@BorderWise12]

Bold suggestion to remove EMP from the game! I wouldn't mind that too much, honestly. As for AP-EMP, what you're saying in the vid seems to suggest more that it makes no difference rather than its actually worse. Did I miss something? Good video! Glad I kept notifications on for this. 😁

[@OhmIsFutile]

Well, it's worse in the sense that adding EMP to an AP shell weakens the AP for no real gain. On the flipside, you could use just pure EMP if you wanted and still get practically the same result on the EMP side while achieving a better RoF because you can use a shorter/slower shell with pure EMP.

[@BorderWise12]

@@OhmIsFutile Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. 😁👍

[@mechastophiles2118]

I'd go for a (new) rework of some kind before I'd suggest removing EMP entirely. It offers the option to disable a target unit without necessarily killing it entirely, which is a niche but valid mechanic. And as others have mentioned, EMP/power surges are a real-world thing that has to be dealt with; it's why we have things like surge-protected power strips, circuit breakers, fuses, and Faraday cages. The bigger question, in my mind, is what would EMP be reworked into/replaced with? How would you make it into an interesting and fun mechanic, as opposed to just another thing on the checklist to account for?

[@OhmIsFutile]

Interesting take on the subject. Honestly, I'd probably go with the way most games deal with this and make it easier to use but less all-or-nothing. For instance, instead of dealing damage, it could disable specific high-impact blocks temporarily, like receivers, shields, and LAMS almost exclusively. On the flipside, it should be harder to defend against. But honestly, I probably wouldn't bother keeping it in the game. Sure we have fuses and other electrical mechanics to think about IRL, but that doesn't mean it needs to be a mechanic ingame. You have to ask yourself how much depth it really adds to the game. Currently it has about as close to zero depth compared to everything else in the game. You either defend it well and you have to get extremely lucky to get value out of it, or you just completely wreck stuff.

[@jakeworsfold3669]

I would like to hear your thoughts on PACs, I find small PACs for planes of other things like that are fine, but the massive max sized PACs that are able to one shot most of the things in the game seams dumb, there’s no risk of having a extremely expensive pac that can barely even be shot at because it kills things so fast, on top of that there is no counter to it unlike every other type of damage source in the game

[@OhmIsFutile]

PACs are actually the worst weapons in the game in terms of cost for the amount of firepower. The reason they are mostly unblockable is to make up for that. I honestly don't think PACs are problematic, especially since their charge time is capped so you can't start the fight with more than 30 seconds of charge. So, if something can one-shot you, you were probably already at a significant material disadvantage or other mistakes were made...

[@dahlular]

This is a very good and insightful video and it brings up some valid points, but honestly I don't mind EMP the way it is right now. I've not really run into problems with it much defensively since I EMP-proof my craft in pretty fair ways, I'd sooner run into issues with other shells and even thump damage before EMP would cause me an issue. I feel like it's just another one of those things to consider when making a craft, and its removal wouldn't really do much but remove more options from players at the end of the day. Your suggestion of giving it a more obvious and interesting visual effect though is very good however. Take this with a grain of salt though since I am the type of person to build plenty more crafts that are functional and pretty, and I don't really do much campaigning with them past faction-wide testing.

[@nicopence3148]

The other option instead of the spine is connecting all susceptible components to only a long (not much since it’s exponential) chain of rubber requiring a stupidly large emp strike to damage anything. Only works on large ships since the defense out scales the weapons after a certain point. Benefits: no repair cost, not worth overcoming. Downsides: creates a physical weak point, renders emp as a damage type useless.

[@coffeezombie244]

Best gosh darn EMP video I have seen. Quick to the point and informative. I do feel EMP is a real got ya weapon and honestly I'm always thrown off when it shows up in tourneys. Heat/Hesh don't require special blocks to counter just different armor design and you're not screwed the way you're screwed when you forget a surge protector and just get one shotted. I do like how the other two big FTD streamers watch your stuff. Top shelf sir!

[@teche6564]

I wonder if this tutorial is going to make EMP pretty much worthless against most craft in the long run.

[@OhmIsFutile]

Probably, but I'm really hoping for EMP to just go away if I'm honest... I don't think it has a place.

[@ddssrr1614]

ACDC song EMP watch it explode. enter guitar riff. Gr8 guides dude. hope they get some attention & updated over time if things change. Guessing its all still relevant thow.

[@alberthogg49]

I think emp would be greatly improved if it didn’t destroy the blocks but disable them temporarily for a time that scales with the pulses strength and maybe stronger less efficient pulses could cause heat damage. Increasing the viability of rubber could be nice as well.

[@NomaeTheJester]

Seems to me the main problem with it is that EMP can dead-end so easily. What if some fraction of 'dead end' EMP damage turned into fragments, instead of just evaporating? Like there was so much EMP the surge protector exploded and turned to shrapnel? Defensively, this would make EMP-proofing more difficult than just sticking surge protectors around, attached only by one end. Offensively, this would make Large bursts of EMP (like crams) viable in a different way than DPS EMP.

[@snowfish7294]

would you consider this good protection from emp for a main side armour 4 meters of metal pointing up heavy armour slope pointing up then surge protector with alloy

[@OhmIsFutile]

It'll do, all of those are low resistance and alloy is relatively higher resistance thus making it very unlikely EMP will enter the vehicle. Just make sure to also spread surge protectors around the vehicle.

[@explosiverift2037]

EMP is like HEAT and HESH, if you don't counter it it's OP, if you do it's near useless.

[@OhmIsFutile]

I think HEAT/HESH are more interesting mechanics and at least interact with more aspects of the game where EMP just feels like its own minigame, but I see where you're coming from

[@shawnreed343]

Part of the problem in this is that it's harder to counter in, say, AotE, where you're restricted in volume. And quite hard indeed on a typical plane-sized craft or a small-ish tank, where your only recourse really is to avoid the EMP in the first place or just... die. Wrapping everything in rubber isn't space efficient, nor cost efficient, considering your next layer of -actual- armor is dimensionally larger in size and thus cost. :( And surge protectors? Gamble. They're incredibly expensive, and won't be pathed towards if the EMP can actually do more damage to something else it can reach.

[@IainDoherty51]

HEAT and HESH both have their places in the game and can be extremely competitive. I've seen a number of tourney entries that did extremely well with them as their main damage type, but EMP on the other hand just punishes small things and poor designs in a way that's frustrating to deal with. There's a reason why a lot of tourneys ban it, and it's not so much because it's OP as because it sucks to watch and is frustrating to deal with. I honestly don't think I'd miss it if it was removed or fully reworked to be a more interesting mechanic (maybe stunning instead of damaging functional components within a radius of the hit instead of killing them?), but for now it's just not fun to deal with or use.

[@love_from_violet5220]

With your comments on AP-EMP, have you considered a target that does have adequate EMP protection? In the video you only mention poorly protected targets and then proceed to test on a clearly poorly protected target.

[@OhmIsFutile]

Yes, if a target has adequate EMP protection, the odds of APEMP doing more than AP or EMP separately are close to zero. The reason it went the way it did in the video was me wondering if people got the idea from the in-game designs being vulnerable to it and I couldn't find any designs that are more vulnerable to APEMP than just straight up EMP.

[@OhmIsFutile]

I've theorycrafted a lot about how APEMP could someone work better than anything else and my conclusion is that it requires too many conditions to be viable, most importantly hitting very close to something sensitive to EMP... and if you can do that then APHE or APFrag will get you the same or better result more often than not. tl;dr even when actively trying to justify it, I can't find a good reason to do it

[@love_from_violet5220]

@@OhmIsFutile Not sure if this is know but EMP has a vision range base on the damage of the surge. Which is one of the biggest things APS EMP has going for it. Many many systems can't be built with surge protectors inside them, and many many systems are very big. So hitting near them is something we do not* have to make an exception for in theory crafting. Landing a small surge near one of the many large systems inside a craft is going to ignore most of the EMP protection in place on any craft. Which makes EMP usable again APEMP surges also generally have more damage then surface detonation surges once actually reaching the internals (depends on armour thickness). However, the AP surge cannot see any where near the amount of craft (potential surges) that the surface detonation can. With APemp, the damage is far more controlled. AP-frag(or HE) is also not nessisarily better. Its extremely common for internals to be covered in their own HA. EMP gets to ignore that HA. As for surges placed with that HA (opposed to the big surge banks and cages people like to make), that's just compatible to the AP-frag having to punch through some HA beams. Its hard to say there which will be better. But neither is entirely shut down. Unlike surface detonation charges which are completely shut down by adequate EMP protection. You are probably familiar with using AP-heat to bypass anti heat defenses. Making HEAT usable again. Exact same thing with AP-EMP. Tldr: APemp means that APS EMP can be used on craft with adequate EMP protection. Opposed to surface detonation EMP which is unusable vs those same craft. And it's very hard to say whether another form of AP-x will perform better (too vague). EMP in general is meh, but APemp is one of its actually usable forms. Kinda like HEAT.

[@OhmIsFutile]

Do you have any working example of this? Unless you're hitting monstrously large beyond anything in Neter, I don't find that to be even remotely the case. I've tried zapping the new Tyr internally with EMP and it often did LESS damage because it was hitting surge protectors more frequently due to, well, getting triggered closer to surge protectors whereas a surface impact had a chance to hit detection and such. If you're wondering why I chose the Tyr, well, it was just about the only thing I found to be built properly when it came to EMP. Just about everything else that was godly from pretty much every faction (TG fared the best beyond the Tyr) was just as vulnerable to EMP from the inside as the outside (if not more on the outside).

[@formicidae9126]

@@love_from_violet5220 ​ hmm, but the only system EMP meaningfully affects is AI, which is one of the smallest internal systems. Sure, it can also get lasers but any worthwhile laser system is already so colossal and almost certainly central to the craft (just look at most neter craft with good lasers) that they're basically impossible to insulate with rubber, which removes the main benefit of apemp, and your whole point about emp range is questionable considering emp can travel at most 2000 blocks, which is a lot and more than enough to go through any armor. basically i don't really follow your point about emp range in large systems because the only systems it can hurt are either always small or so huge that surface det emp will probably do just as good. and in terms of apemp being able to more easily punch through system armor, you yourself bring up the fact that it will hit internal surges (good emp defense mandates them being there) and you also compare apemp having to punch through said surges to apfrag having to punch through armor. if this comparison is good (and i do think it is) then why ever use apemp, when apfrag will have the same effect against emp-vulnerable systems (it either punches through the armor and kills them, or it doesn't) and against emp-resistant systems it also gets to do damage, unlike apemp. really i think the niche-ness of emp kills its uses here. other ap shells can do what it does, and also more.

[@enriquejavier8056]

does the size of the emp block matter? is it better to use 1X1 blocks than 4X1 ?

[@OhmIsFutile]

You mean surge protectors? It doesn't matter a lot, but for some reason the bigger ones get the beam bonus even though they are non-structural blocks.

[@enriquejavier8056]

@@OhmIsFutile yes sorry, meant surge protectors. Thank you Ohm!

[@shawnreed343]

I honestly would LOVE if EMP was removed from FTD. Fuckin' hell, it just adds frustration to the game rather than fun. Part of the problem is how disproportional EMP damage can actually be. Whether between a big EMP volt such as from a large missile, which I really hate, as opposed to a small strike... or between a large craft with many blocks to go through, and a small one where a strike anywhere can probably knock out a system where another type of shell might just overpen or do a chunk of damage rather than kill the craft. It's such a hot mess, EMP- that it paths towards the point where it can do the most damage. Might be less horrible if surge protectors didn't break the bank trying to keep a craft protected from something rocking heavy EMP. (because wrapping it all in rubber is not space or cost efficient either)

[@OhCanadaGamer]

I dunno I always found EMP was easy to hard counter just by building AI and detection on top of surge protectors and liberal use of surge protectors. As far as the best thing to use it PAC wins hands down. It's hit scan and won't get shot down like shells or missiles.

[@OhmIsFutile]

It is easy to counter, and that's exactly why it's a bad mechanic imo. If you know what you're doing, EMP will have to chew through a bunch of surge protectors before doing anything meaningful which usually would take longer than a standard fight... and if you don't know what you're doing say goodbye to your LWCs and AI. All or nothing.

[@williamburden2308]

Nah don't remove emp. Its a bit like saying we should remove gravity cause some people cant build hover tanks. Or that we should ditch the ir detection cause nightfights aren't fun. Emp is a thing, and it should be represented in game, the current system works, and can be defended against as you have shown.

[@OhmIsFutile]

It's not at all like saying "remove gravity." EMP as it stands is mostly binary, either you defend it properly and it's worthless, or you don't and it just completely shuts you down. Since defending EMP also requires thinking about placement and surge protectors, it's also disproportionately powerful against small vehicles. EMP IRL works quite differently, and just because it's a real concept doesn't mean it has to be in the game. This game was never a simulator to begin with and newbie traps that become largely irrelevant once you've attained a certain skill level essentially adds nothing to the game. How many shooting games have guns that are only good against newbies and are praised for it?

[@andrelanger8396]

What if Emp only disabled the stuff that is suitable to it. But it would still permanently damage EMP surge protection, and beams. This would then create other problems.... So difficult

[@OhmIsFutile]

Reworking it opens up options, but I doubt the devs are willing to put in the effort at this point.

[@andrelanger8396]

@@OhmIsFutile why I thought there were still updates coming in the future

[@OhmIsFutile]

Maybe, but I doubt it, they said there would be no major updates after release.

[@TheReader6]

No, emp is awesome!

[@ZackHab]

Personally I hate emp. It really hate it and it at least needs to be made a lot worse

[@dreadpiratelenny1348]

EMP should absolutely be removed from the game. No matter how much they weaken it, it will always be too strong.

[@OhmIsFutile]

Well, assuming you followed through with my thought process in the video, defending EMP on anything larger than a small plane is actually relatively easy... the problem imo is it's just not fun, not particularly impressive visually, and an all-or-nothing mechanic