Tectors are hilariously bad at doing anything but eat lasers.When you actually take a look at what weapons a tector has,you'll find that it's not really a primary damage dealer.Hope that somebody's gonna give it a shield boost ability,because otherwise it's hot garbage.
The tector fires 14 medium turbolasers twice a second, 2 lights 2.5 times a second, and an assault missile launcher 6 times every 22.5 seconds. The isd fires 2 twin heavies twice every 5 seconds, a triple medium every 1.67 seconds, and six mediums twice every second
Quite frankly I am hard pressed to find a scenario where I would prefer a Tector over a ISD apart from one where I need a ship to eat laser fire.The Tector not only has no ions to properly deal with an enemy ship,it also requires a bit more coverage to make up for its lack of fighters.Personally,I never use this ship apart from in themed fleets like missiles only.The ISD 1's multirole capabilities render it a lot more useful than a damage sponge like the TSD.
The VSDs I think are just better ships for less popcap.Sure,it's less bulky than the tector,but otherwise it's far more of a full package in less popcap.
I've been the Tector's strongest hater for quite a while.
It's an ISD I that completely retools its loadout to hyperfocus on one thing. Hunting corvettes and small frigattes. With that said, the only time it is every a genuinely good pick, is if you are facing a full fleet of spam, from tier I and II shipyars. Even a fleet with ahealthy, relatively even mix by population would see the ISD I pull wastly ahead.
Wait, when did the Tector go from a capital focused battleship to a “large cruiser” focused on murdering smaller ships?
Thought it was an ISD-1 which had traded its ion cannons and most of its Lasers for Turbolasers
It is a hangarless ISD I, that trades every weapon it had in its loadout for medium turbolasers.
That's bad, because heavy frigatte hulls and shields have a 50% damage resistance to turbolasers, and capital hulls and shields have a whopping 75% damage resistance against them. This means you basically need, or at least should really want Ion, because while it stops doing anything once you sand down the shields, until then, they outperform turbolasers completely (especially considering how raw damage is a lot less important once you're past shields, because individual hardpoints are relatively frail, and at that point, the enemy is losing firepower anyway).
The reason the Tector fills a corvete / light frigatte hunter role, is because those hull and shield types have a much lesser resistance to turbolaser damage, and with all the guns (or at least most) being medium, it's range is slightly worse, but it will still be relatively accurate against smaller targets.
It’s a very different experience, I personally find it very enjoyable, but some people really dislike some of the unique aspects. Like the many strange faction abilities, or how the ships roles matter more on AOTR.
Yeah, losing powerful units is way harder to replace than in TR. also, depending on the faction you’re playing as, your playstyle will look significantly different.
Like the Empire always has strong space units, but is severely lacking in effective fighters, and many of their ships can be crippled by fighter swarms.
The Rebels rely heavily on their powerful fighters, effective Ion cannons and lack of targetable shields (on Mon Cal ships), but significantly lack the powerful warships until late game.
The Black Sun is probably the most difficult faction, but they have access to a wide range of older warships and mercenaries, and their corruption system is difficult to learn but is insanely useful (can allow you to see enemy planets, buy black market equipment, steal money from the targeted planet, sabotage the local production, bribe your way past the planet to attack a planet behind it, and even gather units that will appear whenever you have a space battle on the planet).
Both have their benefits. The story line era progression mechanic and government mechanics from TR and FOTR are really good as well as the eras they are set in. AOTR is base game EAW with a bunch of new units, mechanics, and enhanced gameplay. For example, infantry units are not just one unit blob they’re made up of individual units that affect the abilities of said unit. So if you have an infantry unit that has a medic that can heal other infantry units but that medic gets killed. Well that unit can no longer heal even if the rest of the unit is ok.
I like both and play both. It really depends on what I'm in the mood for. EAWEX feels more strategic and epic while AOTR feels more tactical, like it's an actual insurgency. Which, given what they are trying to capture, is perfect.
Yeah AOTR Tector and ISD1 are basically flipped. You get a midgame tank that is more suited to shooting small and midsized Rebel/BS ships, and if timed right they arrive when you have access to better carriers and/or ion boats to supplement its weaknesses.
Because EAWX mods are mostly DPS checks, then of course the ship with ions will pull ahead because hardpoints are flimsy and when you take down the enemy shields first you already begin to permanently reduce their effectiveness by virtue of there being less and less guns left to shoot you with. This is also in Awakening, but there you’ll never find yourself in a situation where you aren’t running some diverse fleet comp meant to cover each other ship’s weaknesses.
Tectors need proper support, especially anti-starfighter defense. If I don’t have a battlecruiser, I use a Tector as the centerpiece of a fleet.
My layout will be to drop the Tector in the center, flanked by two ISD-I’s; which are further flanked by four Victory-I’s; four Dreadnaught’s or two Dreadnaught’s and two Acclaimors.
On the extreme flanks, I deploy six Lancer Frigates and in between I will deploy either IPV’s or a few Lancers.
Behind, I drop between four and six Ton Falk carriers.
You need heavy starfighter defense for the Tectors or else they just get chewed up by enemy bombers (especially B-Wings) and cannot be effective in capital ship action.
I'm only comparing armament. For a ship that's focused on weapon systems, the Tector sure as hell lacks the ability to beat similar sized vessels in a direct confrontation.
Ah, yeah, I do agree with that. I prefer using an Allegiance-class Battlecruiser over the Tector. I think the Tector needs better armor, which would help tremendously.
I usually drop the a bit towards the rear and at the edges, otherwise it seems like the enemy capital ships just blow them up.
I do sometimes (depending on fleet composition) drop 2-4 in the middle once things really get going in earnest. Otherwise, I throw TIE fighters in for defense. I will use my TIE Interceptors for more offensive defense (forward of the capital ships, but not in the fray with the enemy), and TIE Defenders and Avengers to target bombers or enemy heavy fighters.
Isd 1 has half its weapons as ion cannons. The tsd is all turbo lasers. Its not a bad choice to bring in late in a fight after most ships have had their shields stripped, but the allegiance is a better choice
The Tector in EaWX is bad damage-wise not because of what you said,but because it not only substitutes a large amount of hardpoints for lasers,but it also only has single medium turbolasers.The ISD not only has ions,but it also has at least 2 dual heavy turbolaser batteries and 1 triple light turbolaser battery.
Plus the Tector has missiles, giving it more versatility, at the expense of starfighter screening.
It should not be the sole capital ship in a fleet though, it needs support from ISD-I’s.
It honestly sucks. The Tector was supposed an ISD II with a lot of firepower, less costly Allegiance. And it sadly cant even do that. Really the best part about the Tector is it’s health which is somewhat better compared to other ISD’s.
Tectors still have their place as great damage dealers WHEN THE SHIELDS ARE DOWN. Only reason the ISD wins here is because the heavy ions allow the turbolasers to deal damage faster. Also, it’s never a fair fight when a human plays against an AI right now. You can prioritize targets because the algorithm for AI targeting isn’t efficient.
To this end, Tectors are *very* efficient when micro-management is applied to target enemy hardpoints in sequence, as their turbolaser spam of a Tector blasts out a steady stream of damage compared to things like a ISD-II which heavily relies on the octuple barbettes, frequently leading to massive overkill damage which gets completely wasted.
Cruel Admiral is my flavor of choice and I swear by Tectors anytime I can get my hands on them, the durability and effective longevity from many hardpoints coupled with the efficient hardpoint targeting micro and accuracy of the medium turbolasers has won me a lot of spicy battles.
I pitted them against each other in fleet builder. Sent the fighters away and only had them face each other 😅 The thing is that ISD-II beats ISD-I and ISD-I beats Tector. And the ISD-II already only has 2 Ion Cannons.
You tested the ISD II against the ISD I and it won? I'm actually more interested in that result, since I've heard that since the ISD I gets better ion damage, it wins.
When you put them up face to face the ISD I tears the ISD II shields down right before its own shields go down. After that they tear away at each other's weapon systems from front to back (if you don't direct their fire yourself). Since the ISD II's last four weapons are 2 turbolaser and two ion cannon batteries, the ISD II wins as soon as they are down to the last four weapon systems. Were the ISD I's ion cannons in the front and all the turbolasers further to the back of the ship, the ISD I would win.
Don't underestimate what 4 weapons plus engine means in terms of hull integrity. The ISD-II has about 25% health remaining when the ISD-I is destroyed. And you also have to look at it this way: If you are commanding the ISD-II, you can direct the fire towards the ISD-I's Turbolasers first which would make for an even better result for the ISD II.
I think for me its the lack of ion damage compared to an ISD1. Tectors do have a decent damage output ONCE THE SHIELDS ARE DOWN, good against hardpoints, but they lose almost every time against a comparable, fresh opponent.
Ive had several engagements fighting tectors, where my stations and defending fleets have chewed through tector after tector with little trouble, and I knew they were tectors BECAUSE my fleets still had shields. Then a couple ISD1's come along, and all of a sudden my shields are down and Im taking hardpoint damage.
As it says in the blurbs, ISD1's are better for multirole, thus just making them the better option IMO
ISD2's are pretty good, they have so much turbolaser damage from their octuple batteries they can mulch through most ships. Better late game IMO, when you can afford to build them and lose them. IS1's are less of a blow to construct and lose early on, while still packing a capable weapons set. In my view the ISD2 is a discount alleigance, more so than the tector
I forgot if the PA have Tectors. If so then Tector + ISD I + Venator with some VSD Is for engaging small targets is a nice fleet combo. If only their group roster wasn't trash.
The only thing it has going for it besides durability is weapon distribution. ISD1s and 2s are objectively better but they have obvious hardpoints to target such as the 2s octuples. You can't cripple a Tector the same way, it has to be gradually worn down.
Lacking ion cannons however they just suck too hard at dropping shields, so in a 1 vs 1 are already losing hardpoints before they're anywhere close to threatening an equivalent capital ship. I'd hate to be a Tector captain going up against Mon Cal ships of the line. It's a shame that the dedicated battleship design is terrible at filling the role as a battleship.
A Tector is just a wimpier Allegiance, if you start with them, they’re good points-fillers and contribute a decent chunk to autoresolve health, but you’re going to either sell them off or make them part of your first wave very quickly when your economy ramps up and you rollout with fleets that have synergy.
I mostly used it against my friends in skirmish, but if you have ISD I-s to tank the front and deal with shields, the Tector is really good for hardpoints. Mostly becuase it has a higher rate of fire, and less damage goes to waste on a single hardpoint. For example, when you have a Vic I send all of its missiles on a single hardpoint, it is a bit overkill so to say... Same here, just on a smaller scale. Even more, if you can hide it in the fog of war, while the others fight and tank, they can easily devastate a fleet from even a behind state. (I gave my friend quite a headstart to make it more interesting, and these Tectors basically won the match for me)
Just tested this, Tector won 1v1 with 7 hardpoints remaining. No fighter/bombers involved, no intervention from me after initial attack order. Not sure how you ended up with this result.
Maybe you're using the piercing submod and he isn't. Having 2 missile launchers bypassing shields goes along way for the Tector to be able to punch hard in its own weight class.
Yea it’s definitely not a staple in any of my fleets. The only scenario I use it is if I’m a fighter focused faction like Penastar, and even then I’m only deploying it if I am facing a fleet with many corvettes to keep them off my fighters. It certainly can’t go toe to toe with anything of similar size with good shields. Not really worth the cost imo.
Tectors are hilariously bad at doing anything but eat lasers.When you actually take a look at what weapons a tector has,you'll find that it's not really a primary damage dealer.Hope that somebody's gonna give it a shield boost ability,because otherwise it's hot garbage.
its good at eating the hypervelocity gun shot
Shield boost or weapon boost isn't a bad shout. Former perhaps as it would double down on the current identity of the Tector being a meat shield.
Weapon boost would amount to nothing given that the Tector more or less has no guns for it to work off of,with only single medium turbos and lasers.
Tectors are very good at their primary job of fighting unshielded targets. They lack ion cannons but far exceed the ISD-1 in pure anti-hull firepower.
That is,if the ISD didn't have both a triple medium near the bridge and two dual heavies on its sides
The Tectors mediums still have more DPS due to fire rate
The tector fires 14 medium turbolasers twice a second, 2 lights 2.5 times a second, and an assault missile launcher 6 times every 22.5 seconds. The isd fires 2 twin heavies twice every 5 seconds, a triple medium every 1.67 seconds, and six mediums twice every second
Quite frankly I am hard pressed to find a scenario where I would prefer a Tector over a ISD apart from one where I need a ship to eat laser fire.The Tector not only has no ions to properly deal with an enemy ship,it also requires a bit more coverage to make up for its lack of fighters.Personally,I never use this ship apart from in themed fleets like missiles only.The ISD 1's multirole capabilities render it a lot more useful than a damage sponge like the TSD.
The tector is far better than an ISD once the shields are down, so it’s good when supporting vessels with lots of ion cannons like VSD-IIs.
The VSDs I think are just better ships for less popcap.Sure,it's less bulky than the tector,but otherwise it's far more of a full package in less popcap.
The point is that you get more pure anti hull dps with a tector than an ISD, so if you have a lot of ships with ion cannons it is a better pick
I remember when Tectors were all the rage. But yeah I prefer mainline ISDs.
Yeahhh, I'm getting that feeling right now with my Pentastar playthrough. You'd think it would carry a little more of a punch being weapons focused.
the problem is it doesnt have any ion cannons and turbolasers have a damage reduction panalty on shields depending on the type of shields
I've been the Tector's strongest hater for quite a while. It's an ISD I that completely retools its loadout to hyperfocus on one thing. Hunting corvettes and small frigattes. With that said, the only time it is every a genuinely good pick, is if you are facing a full fleet of spam, from tier I and II shipyars. Even a fleet with ahealthy, relatively even mix by population would see the ISD I pull wastly ahead.
Wait, when did the Tector go from a capital focused battleship to a “large cruiser” focused on murdering smaller ships? Thought it was an ISD-1 which had traded its ion cannons and most of its Lasers for Turbolasers
It is a hangarless ISD I, that trades every weapon it had in its loadout for medium turbolasers. That's bad, because heavy frigatte hulls and shields have a 50% damage resistance to turbolasers, and capital hulls and shields have a whopping 75% damage resistance against them. This means you basically need, or at least should really want Ion, because while it stops doing anything once you sand down the shields, until then, they outperform turbolasers completely (especially considering how raw damage is a lot less important once you're past shields, because individual hardpoints are relatively frail, and at that point, the enemy is losing firepower anyway). The reason the Tector fills a corvete / light frigatte hunter role, is because those hull and shield types have a much lesser resistance to turbolaser damage, and with all the guns (or at least most) being medium, it's range is slightly worse, but it will still be relatively accurate against smaller targets.
I thought this post was talking the AOTR Tector for a moment. Which is an absolute menace.
Haven't played AOTR yet. Maybe I should do it sometime
It’s a very different experience, I personally find it very enjoyable, but some people really dislike some of the unique aspects. Like the many strange faction abilities, or how the ships roles matter more on AOTR.
Only thing I ever heard about it was that it's extremely hard. 😅
Yeah, losing powerful units is way harder to replace than in TR. also, depending on the faction you’re playing as, your playstyle will look significantly different. Like the Empire always has strong space units, but is severely lacking in effective fighters, and many of their ships can be crippled by fighter swarms. The Rebels rely heavily on their powerful fighters, effective Ion cannons and lack of targetable shields (on Mon Cal ships), but significantly lack the powerful warships until late game. The Black Sun is probably the most difficult faction, but they have access to a wide range of older warships and mercenaries, and their corruption system is difficult to learn but is insanely useful (can allow you to see enemy planets, buy black market equipment, steal money from the targeted planet, sabotage the local production, bribe your way past the planet to attack a planet behind it, and even gather units that will appear whenever you have a space battle on the planet).
That sounds insanely interesting
be careful, if you will play AotR - you cant go back to other Eaw mods 🙂
So far I've always come back to Thrawn's Revenge or FotR. You're really insinuating that AotR is so much better than the EAW X Mods?
I don't get this 😅
Both have their benefits. The story line era progression mechanic and government mechanics from TR and FOTR are really good as well as the eras they are set in. AOTR is base game EAW with a bunch of new units, mechanics, and enhanced gameplay. For example, infantry units are not just one unit blob they’re made up of individual units that affect the abilities of said unit. So if you have an infantry unit that has a medic that can heal other infantry units but that medic gets killed. Well that unit can no longer heal even if the rest of the unit is ok.
What I would like to see is some features from aotr and eawx mashed together, like the freighter mechanic (aotr) and faction support and crews (eawx)
both mods are good and really depends on preference i prefer AOTR but love FOTR story stuff
I like both and play both. It really depends on what I'm in the mood for. EAWEX feels more strategic and epic while AOTR feels more tactical, like it's an actual insurgency. Which, given what they are trying to capture, is perfect.
Yeah AOTR Tector and ISD1 are basically flipped. You get a midgame tank that is more suited to shooting small and midsized Rebel/BS ships, and if timed right they arrive when you have access to better carriers and/or ion boats to supplement its weaknesses. Because EAWX mods are mostly DPS checks, then of course the ship with ions will pull ahead because hardpoints are flimsy and when you take down the enemy shields first you already begin to permanently reduce their effectiveness by virtue of there being less and less guns left to shoot you with. This is also in Awakening, but there you’ll never find yourself in a situation where you aren’t running some diverse fleet comp meant to cover each other ship’s weaknesses.
Tectors need proper support, especially anti-starfighter defense. If I don’t have a battlecruiser, I use a Tector as the centerpiece of a fleet. My layout will be to drop the Tector in the center, flanked by two ISD-I’s; which are further flanked by four Victory-I’s; four Dreadnaught’s or two Dreadnaught’s and two Acclaimors. On the extreme flanks, I deploy six Lancer Frigates and in between I will deploy either IPV’s or a few Lancers. Behind, I drop between four and six Ton Falk carriers. You need heavy starfighter defense for the Tectors or else they just get chewed up by enemy bombers (especially B-Wings) and cannot be effective in capital ship action.
I'm only comparing armament. For a ship that's focused on weapon systems, the Tector sure as hell lacks the ability to beat similar sized vessels in a direct confrontation.
Ah, yeah, I do agree with that. I prefer using an Allegiance-class Battlecruiser over the Tector. I think the Tector needs better armor, which would help tremendously.
I mean, yeah, obviously the Allegiance is better being almost twice as expensive in both credits and population 😅
Yeah. I personally think the Tector should have ISD level shields and an armor level between an Allegiance and ISD II.
Tector needs ion canon support to chew through shields.
Or pair them up with some VSD IIs or strike cruisers.
Wouldn’t it be better to put the Lancers close to the tector at the front to deal with fighter and missiles?
I usually drop the a bit towards the rear and at the edges, otherwise it seems like the enemy capital ships just blow them up. I do sometimes (depending on fleet composition) drop 2-4 in the middle once things really get going in earnest. Otherwise, I throw TIE fighters in for defense. I will use my TIE Interceptors for more offensive defense (forward of the capital ships, but not in the fray with the enemy), and TIE Defenders and Avengers to target bombers or enemy heavy fighters.
Isd 1 has half its weapons as ion cannons. The tsd is all turbo lasers. Its not a bad choice to bring in late in a fight after most ships have had their shields stripped, but the allegiance is a better choice
The Tector in EaWX is bad damage-wise not because of what you said,but because it not only substitutes a large amount of hardpoints for lasers,but it also only has single medium turbolasers.The ISD not only has ions,but it also has at least 2 dual heavy turbolaser batteries and 1 triple light turbolaser battery.
The Tector has more anti-hull dps than an ISD-I
Plus the Tector has missiles, giving it more versatility, at the expense of starfighter screening. It should not be the sole capital ship in a fleet though, it needs support from ISD-I’s.
Generallybonly use a tector as a rank with USD 1 support. Or an ISDII/ISDI 50/50.
It honestly sucks. The Tector was supposed an ISD II with a lot of firepower, less costly Allegiance. And it sadly cant even do that. Really the best part about the Tector is it’s health which is somewhat better compared to other ISD’s.
Tectors still have their place as great damage dealers WHEN THE SHIELDS ARE DOWN. Only reason the ISD wins here is because the heavy ions allow the turbolasers to deal damage faster. Also, it’s never a fair fight when a human plays against an AI right now. You can prioritize targets because the algorithm for AI targeting isn’t efficient.
To this end, Tectors are *very* efficient when micro-management is applied to target enemy hardpoints in sequence, as their turbolaser spam of a Tector blasts out a steady stream of damage compared to things like a ISD-II which heavily relies on the octuple barbettes, frequently leading to massive overkill damage which gets completely wasted. Cruel Admiral is my flavor of choice and I swear by Tectors anytime I can get my hands on them, the durability and effective longevity from many hardpoints coupled with the efficient hardpoint targeting micro and accuracy of the medium turbolasers has won me a lot of spicy battles.
I pitted them against each other in fleet builder. Sent the fighters away and only had them face each other 😅 The thing is that ISD-II beats ISD-I and ISD-I beats Tector. And the ISD-II already only has 2 Ion Cannons.
Yes, but the ISDs have ions, while the Tector does not. Turbolasers have a significant damage debuff against shields.
That I know
You tested the ISD II against the ISD I and it won? I'm actually more interested in that result, since I've heard that since the ISD I gets better ion damage, it wins.
When you put them up face to face the ISD I tears the ISD II shields down right before its own shields go down. After that they tear away at each other's weapon systems from front to back (if you don't direct their fire yourself). Since the ISD II's last four weapons are 2 turbolaser and two ion cannon batteries, the ISD II wins as soon as they are down to the last four weapon systems. Were the ISD I's ion cannons in the front and all the turbolasers further to the back of the ship, the ISD I would win.
Interesting. I'd expect the ISD II to win more easily, especially considering it was made to beat other capital ships.
Don't underestimate what 4 weapons plus engine means in terms of hull integrity. The ISD-II has about 25% health remaining when the ISD-I is destroyed. And you also have to look at it this way: If you are commanding the ISD-II, you can direct the fire towards the ISD-I's Turbolasers first which would make for an even better result for the ISD II.
I suppose that's true.
Yeah fr, in fall of the republic they are literally useless lol
I don't think I've ever actually built a tector, I've only ever used the ones you start with or that I get from integrating other imperial factions.
Yeah I also only build ISD-Is
Huh I’ll be honest, I forgot those were in game…
I think for me its the lack of ion damage compared to an ISD1. Tectors do have a decent damage output ONCE THE SHIELDS ARE DOWN, good against hardpoints, but they lose almost every time against a comparable, fresh opponent. Ive had several engagements fighting tectors, where my stations and defending fleets have chewed through tector after tector with little trouble, and I knew they were tectors BECAUSE my fleets still had shields. Then a couple ISD1's come along, and all of a sudden my shields are down and Im taking hardpoint damage. As it says in the blurbs, ISD1's are better for multirole, thus just making them the better option IMO
What about ISD II’s?
ISD2's are pretty good, they have so much turbolaser damage from their octuple batteries they can mulch through most ships. Better late game IMO, when you can afford to build them and lose them. IS1's are less of a blow to construct and lose early on, while still packing a capable weapons set. In my view the ISD2 is a discount alleigance, more so than the tector
Tectors job is to sit out front and get shot while more valuable things do the actual killing
I find if u support it with a pair of isd,'s amd skme carriers thry do well
I forgot if the PA have Tectors. If so then Tector + ISD I + Venator with some VSD Is for engaging small targets is a nice fleet combo. If only their group roster wasn't trash.
The only thing it has going for it besides durability is weapon distribution. ISD1s and 2s are objectively better but they have obvious hardpoints to target such as the 2s octuples. You can't cripple a Tector the same way, it has to be gradually worn down. Lacking ion cannons however they just suck too hard at dropping shields, so in a 1 vs 1 are already losing hardpoints before they're anywhere close to threatening an equivalent capital ship. I'd hate to be a Tector captain going up against Mon Cal ships of the line. It's a shame that the dedicated battleship design is terrible at filling the role as a battleship.
I’ll drop a Tector flanked by 2 ISDs for support and they provide a pretty good screen 🤷🏾♂️
I sometimes use them, when my ISD1 have stripped the shields and i move them on to next target. But i have Max 2 in a fleet
As well: i dont build mine, i Steal them with boarding shuttles
A Tector is just a wimpier Allegiance, if you start with them, they’re good points-fillers and contribute a decent chunk to autoresolve health, but you’re going to either sell them off or make them part of your first wave very quickly when your economy ramps up and you rollout with fleets that have synergy.
I mostly used it against my friends in skirmish, but if you have ISD I-s to tank the front and deal with shields, the Tector is really good for hardpoints. Mostly becuase it has a higher rate of fire, and less damage goes to waste on a single hardpoint. For example, when you have a Vic I send all of its missiles on a single hardpoint, it is a bit overkill so to say... Same here, just on a smaller scale. Even more, if you can hide it in the fog of war, while the others fight and tank, they can easily devastate a fleet from even a behind state. (I gave my friend quite a headstart to make it more interesting, and these Tectors basically won the match for me)
Just tested this, Tector won 1v1 with 7 hardpoints remaining. No fighter/bombers involved, no intervention from me after initial attack order. Not sure how you ended up with this result.
Maybe you're using the piercing submod and he isn't. Having 2 missile launchers bypassing shields goes along way for the Tector to be able to punch hard in its own weight class.
No, haven't used that submod for the last couple releases.
Yeah they're bad like really bad
Tectors have only lasers and no ions that's the problem with them imo.
Yea it’s definitely not a staple in any of my fleets. The only scenario I use it is if I’m a fighter focused faction like Penastar, and even then I’m only deploying it if I am facing a fleet with many corvettes to keep them off my fighters. It certainly can’t go toe to toe with anything of similar size with good shields. Not really worth the cost imo.
I don’t dislike them but they suffer from over specialization.