Thank you for finally coming out and saying this in public.

I definitely understand where you're coming from, but I feel quite certain that making CC easier just creates another slicing situation. Literally the only people who like slicing are few that use it. It needed nerfing and we got it done. Its "okay" now. If we make other CC's easier, we just substitute something else back in its place. Encouraging people to want to be good enough to hit a moving target, with lasers, is the real goal. Not encouraging them to CC someone first. But I also appreciate not everyone shares my view. CC needs to be finely balanced. I lean toward not liking too much of it. Again, I definitely respect and appreciate how you feel on this. Personally, I kind of like it. It provides a different dynamic. A Kuat DOM 8v8 plays very differently to a 12v12, and I like that difference and the challenge it provides. You're really unlucky if you eat a Protorp at B at Kuat. A Scout in there is quite impervious to protorps, even if means you have to kite a lot.

This is how I intended it to come across. I can hold my hands up and say I could've done a better job.

Yeah sorry Flux, but this doesn't work with Verain. He does make it personal. I don't even take this as an insult. Its true. I am idealistic. I do try to get stuff done. Even if the odds are against me. Yes, that is me.

Noted. You guys still lobbied the devs, though. So it sounds bit rich Verain playing police man on how we try to get stuff done. I never put a plural in there. Just because you are a collective team does not mean a comment made toward Verain encompasses you too. I know you solo queue, and you proved yourself. Again, not plural. But for the record, the reason I keep throwing that one in Verain's face is because he likes to use his "I've played more GSF than you ever will, so only my opinion counts" tactic. Which I will drag up and quote if I have to. You'll note, I have never said that in a conversation with you. So maybe reign Verain in a little and we don't have to go down this road. You ask me to reign it in a little, are you doing the same with Verain? Verain likes to come in like he's a heavy weight, belittle people and infer that their opinions carry no weight. You coached me for short time Drakolich. You know me well enough. I told you back then I wont stand for it. Nothing has changed. See my comments above, I am willing to concede that was an over-sight. An honest error. Even willing to adjust the petition accordingly.. Doesn't mean I am a manipulative demanding bully like Verain has said I am. I'm just trying to get something done for the community,( I feel you know that) and I can concede where I make mistakes. But Verain comes in like Mr Policeman and throwing his weight around and making baseless accusations, which draws out my sarcastic argumentative side. Fair comments, but it doesn't mean my petition for RS didnt work and that it wasnt the reason it finally got nerfed, like Verain is now claiming. Which is a huge change of tune, all because it suits his agenda in the here and now. There are plenty of things people have made many threads about that have not been addressed, and RS was one of them.

Yeah not a great option. No reason to take them. Only thing they have over RFL or LLC is range. But Scouts do best up close, so the range isnt needed. LLC and RFL offer far better features like wider arc, improved tracking, higher DPS and armor piecing. Personally, I wouldn't change pods at all. Currently pods sit in that collective of weapons / builds that require a high level of skill to use competently. Giving them proximity detonation would make them easier to use, and i think there has been enough of that already in the game. If someone wants "easy" weapons, there are plenty of them to choose from. The question is, do you actually want Sabotage Probe made easier to use? It takes a lot of skill use that build, as you noticed from how many you typically land. It fits in that collective of high skill builds. No one likes being sabo-probed. Just like no one likes being sliced. Both make you feel dead in the water and helpless. But, at least with sabo-probes you have respect the skill of the pilot to land it and get the follow up kill. Of the sabo-probes that land on me, I survive far more than kill me. That's because there are two elements to it, landing the probe, then getting the follow up kill. Even if you learn to do the first, most players are not efficient enough to finish you off before the probe times out. If you make it easier, you will see more of it. Which means you will have more probes landing on you. Do you want that? Yeah its pretty bad. Booster Recharge is a funny one. You mostly see lower skill pilots using it to compensate for not being used to the lack of engines on a Scout when they are used to flying Strikes with QCS. But it certainly has value. It can definitely get you out of a pickle, and I have seen some great pilots do very well with it. But its also not a meta choice. It thinks its good to have as a option though. Good for pilots to learn fly scouts. Yep, another pretty useless weapon. Not sure how you wold fix them. Personally I wouldn't like to see more slow / drain effects added. More on that below. . It should be the 2nd most popular GS, since its actually very good in specific scenarios, where as the T2 is objectivity bad altogether. But that's a different topic. Maybe on the T3 due it its role. But not on anything else. I don't feel we should add more slow / drain / interdiction effects to the game. There is enough of that already. It certainly has its place, I just don't think we need more. Kind of two issues here. Do I think protorps should be nerfed? Yes. Well, actually what I would do is lesave them as is but remove Effcient Taregting from the game, or make ET 5% instead of 10%. There by removing the emphasis on missiles and putting it back on lasers. Reducing Armor pen overall.... hhmm. interesting one. Never considered it. I think the idea could have legs. But that can get quite complex in how it would effect the meta. Needs to be carefully planned and tested. This is not a problem of 12v12s in smaller maps. This is a problem of the Strike meta. Let me be clear I am not complaining about the meta. Its in a good state and overall I am very happy with it. But what 5.5 did was make Strikes strong. The biggest meta defining aspect of which, is protorps. They are a huge threat because of the sheer number of people using them in any one match. Odds are, a missile hits you, its a Protorp. And sooner or later, one will hit you. One person exclusively trying to lock protorps on you, not such a problem. Even if you are a Scout Ace and an expert at evading them, they still dictate how you fly. Changing the overwhelming number of Strikes in smaller maps, is solved by giving people incentive / reason to fly something else, or to work harder for missile locks and put more emphasis on lasers again. Which again, I think would be achieved by removing or altering Efficient Targeting. Strikes still get all the buffs they got in 5.5, but they now require you to work a little harder, and encourage you to use lasers instead of missiles. Thoughts?

You lobbied the devs for changes in SWS, and when you didn't get it, you quit the game and came back here. Don't give me that. It is at worst short sighted. I was trying to bring together the main things I have seen on the forum, on discords, and have seen other pilots mention, both recently and in my entire time in the game. I'm trying to do something good for GSF, because honestly people do want more than just bugs fixed and matchmaker improved. Perhaps I should have just made a petition asking for "Development and Content" and "Quality of life improvements". I know you won't believe otherwise, because you are Verain and I have my suspensions about why you are being extra hostile over this matter, but I can concede that might have been a better way to do it, rather than a multi-point petition. However, that's nothing more than being a little short sighted. You won't think otherwise., but I don't care. See, you can keep saying that, but the bottom line is there were countless threads moaning about Remote slicing over the three years since it became meta, and it never got nerfed. I make a petition, and it gets nerfed in a matter of months. After the devs directly acknowledged the attached discussion thread. So you can keep saying the petition had nothing to do with it, but it doesn't make it true. You're just saying it because it fits your arguments now. But back then, at the time, you gave your full support to the petition, and you even credited the petition for being responsible for getting the ball moving. You made this comment on the petition, not on the attached discussion thread. So don't say now that petitions don't work and that the RS nerf didn't need to be a petition. Really Verain, accusing me of not having cartel ships, even after I told you I did. Now directly contradicting what you said in January this year, because it suits you. You need to step up your arguments. I expect better from you. I agree, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. People are not moaning about class imbalance like they do in ground PVP. They are not moaning about a mode that is fundamentally imbalanced. They are moaning about match balance. Matchmaker. Thank you for clarifying for everyone that your accusations toward me are based on assumptions. Way to look good there Verain Now, moving on to facts. You win the battle of who has the most cartel ships. I have 30. 39 is a lot. But so is 30. Are you going to apologize for calling me a liar now? But the point is, both numbers are high enough that your arguments [assumptions] fall apart. If I only had 5 cartel ships, your arguments might hold weight. Or conversely if I had 60. Either way it doesn't matter because you have admitted to making assumptions. But, I am just as screwed over as you if I get the change I want. But since you only have assumptions, and can't prove them, let me spell it out for you. And please, try not to gloss over this part and ignore it again. I want legacy unlock for cartel ships, because I think its morally correct, and would prompt more players to buy into having cartel ships.Even though I spent a lot on them already, I think its fair and just that others should not have to. I know for a fact, some players would buy them if it unlocked legacy wide. Now, as for how powerful having a duplicate cartel ship is? Its not. Really. Simply as that. Oh, you want evidence? Sure. Of my recent 100 try-hard win characters over all servers, which netted 77-82% win ratios, none of them had cartel ships. I am willing to furnish screen shots if you call me a lair again. Actually, there is no need, I already did. Go check that thread. The only try-hard win character that has a duplicate ship (both standard and cartel variants on the same bar) is my Scout-only toon, that I did the 100 try-hard Scout games with. And that is so that I can have TDM and DOM versions of the T2S. All the other characters that have cartel ships, are running them as a singular cosmetic change, with no duplicate ship on the bar. Some of those toons are try-hard win toons, some are lulz toons. Having a duplicate ship is probably more benefit to you than it is to me, since you play exclusively in a premade, not solo. I know you have mentioned in the past about having two different T1Gs on your bar. And i get that, in your premade, that would make sense. Two T1Gs on my bar would limit me. But you don't know about this because you know, you don't play solo. You play roles, so you don't have to worry about having a ship for every situation. As a solo try-hard win player, I do. So having two versions of the same ship on my bar, typically reduces my available ships for all situations to 4, rather than 5. I used to run T1F in two versions on my bar, but that was back when I was half the player I am now. These days I find that a limitation. The only ships I need to win, are the standard ships. This would account for why you have an inflated opinion of how powerful it is to have two versions of the same ship on your bar.

It Verain, look at his forum signature. Search his name. This is what he does. Its his thing. I was pretty sure of this too, and all I am trying to do is get something moving in that respect. I knew there would be division over it. There always is And I was fairly certain from whom it would come. I was ready for it. But trust, He does want development and content. He already openly stated it. "We agree on plenty of it" was what he said. He just doesn't like the format of the petition. Perhaps I should have phrased it on those words. Development and content. Rather than being specific. It honestly never occurred to me. Perhaps I still will.

Those are your words not mine. I never implied such. Do I feel GSF has been left out? Yes. And its clear that is has been left out. If a petition isn't how we fix it, what is? Go back to siting on our hands? You're big on assumptions aren't you. Bully? Demand? Again, your words. You already said we agree on "plenty of it." So its clearly not just my wants is it. You just don't like the format of a petition. That's been done a hundred times if not more,. Yes I could have, but its been done. IF that's the case how come it didn't get nerfed until I started the petition, with a corresponding discussion thread, where the devs acknowledged it, and then nerfed it. You can keep telling yourself that the petition had nothing to do with it, and that it would have got nerfed anyway. Because, quite clearly, the three years before that proves you right, doesn't it? How many countless "individual" threads about slicing were made in that time. in fact while you are on this trip trying to belittle the previous petition as proof this one stands no chance, here is your comment on the petition to nerf remote slicing>>>>>>>>> Trust me you are doing a sterling job. That is entirely the point here. Yes the class balances is extremely good, but the games are still a hot mess. Again, matchmaker threads have been common place on here. Good input. I like this. I don't even know where to begin with this. I think I'll leave it. Re-read the petition. A lot of assumptions again. Perhaps I should summon Grav who can testify to how much fleet comms can be farmed in one evening, because he does it on a semi-regular basis. You, obviously don't. I don't. Its not that important to me. But I know how to do it, and yes, it is a thing. You've been away in SWS so it doesn't surprise me you missed this one. Assumptions assumptions assumptions. Not exactly pay to win is it. A noob with two cartel ships will still suck. The ace who knows how to win will do so with or without two cartel ships. The toons where I have two of the same are just for giggles, so I can run a Scout in TDM that's got more engines and is a little more robust than my DOM build, for example. But that doesn't mean I win more because of it. My try hard win toons need only standard ships available to all. And again, unlocking in collections means this small arguable "advantage" is more accessible for everyone. People said this about the slicing nerf, but look what happened there. I can literally show you the comments on that thread saying nothing would happen. You may be right, but if that does end up being the case, that's okay. At least I tried, and can be happy in the knowledge I tried. That arrogance you were talking about. Perhaps I should consult with Verain daily so I know what I really think and feel. Did you miss [choose to ignore] the part where I told you I have more cartel ships on more toons than you? So how can my goal be to screw over people like you? I was not aware of this. IF that is the case, then that part of the petition may be a non-starter. Either way, no that is not what I am asking, as I didn't know of that. . Again, choosing to ignore the part where I said I have more cartel ships than you. Do you remember recently when you were trying to belittle me on some other thread? And to validate your argument (for whatever the topic was) you said that you had played more GSF than I ever will? And that just isn't true is it. Because when pointed out that I had played over 12k games, which is probably more than you at this point, and even if it isn't, it's still certainly more solo games than you. The point is you used "belittle" tactics to try and shut me up. But when I told you how many games I have played, you never replied. So now the same thing is happening here. That's three times now you have stated that I am doing this to get more free stuff and screw over those who already bought that stuff. So listen up. Just like I am confident I have more games under my belt than you, I am also confident I have more cartel ships than yoo. And if I am wrong, both are certainly still in the numbers that debunk your belittling tactics. 12k games is a lot regardless, I know a thing or two now, even though you may not like that. And I have enough cartel ships that if anyone gets screwed here, its me. So no, I am not buying into your self pitty. Seriously, you really did ignore that part didn't you? How did you get through all that and not register that I explicitly stated I likely have more cartel ships than you? I'm speechless. Even in the face of me already saying that, you openly state again that I never bought any and just want to screw over those who do. Its quite arrogant you know Do I need to take screen shots of all my characters with Cartel ships? Or are you going to insist again that I don't have any, never bought any, and only want to screw those who did? Come on Verain, you're a lot of things but you aren't stupid. You either chose to ignore that part, hoping no one (and myself) would notice that your rants are contrary to what I already told you. OR you didn't read it. Neither is good, man.

GSF doesn't have un-mirrored classes. Don't think it matters what the mode will be, imbalance will remain. But I'm not pushing for Fleet battles. It was a by the by mention. I will amend the petition to mention other modes, and make it clear we are happy for anything. Great idea. Staying neutral on the particulars of how to do it, but your inference is that there has to be a middle ground, and I agree. I will amend the petition to reflect this. Exactly. Map / mode, legacy unlock, conversions, and companions all amended in the petition to better reflect the personal wishes of comments made in this thread. An emphasis has been put on flexibility and finding a middle ground.

GSF Camera Shake Preferences > Game > Controls > Camera > GSF camera shake. Turn it off, or find your preferred setting. I run mine at 20%. It makes aiming easier, especially in Scouts.

Congrats! Being on gen chat doesn't count for less. Usually I find they do it in gen chat if it's mid-game, because they want others to see it. It will be a whisper if its post game. I had it on gen chat yesterday, during the game. I like the ideas of sending them a present though I used to try to talk to them. Now I just ignore it. The first of many I am sure. You've unlocked the flood gates now.

So to repeat the issue here, GSF has been largely neglected. Every long term pilot knows it. If it received regular updates and content like the ground game does, then there would be no need for a multi-point petition. The petition is essentially saying, "hey Devs, GSF kind of needs a little work please." People put individual posts up all the time asking for things, and what happens? Nothing. We tried that, it doesn't work. Time for a new approach. You'll thank me if this works. Regardless of whether you disagree with the approach. Now on to each request. I don't have the experience with fleet battles, you do. So I'm hearing you, but, GSF is not balanced anyway, and neither is SWS. So balance and mode would seem to be entirely unrelated. That is a matchmaker issue, mostly. It doesn't matter what new mode is introduced, it will still be unbalanced unless matchmaker receives a heavy overall. And even then, I am skeptical that would fix it. It won't be unbalanced because its fleet battles. Now, that said, any new mode works for me, and I would be fine with a Capture the point type mode. You did disagree with it. I appreciate some players have tremendous amounts of fleet requisition stored up. But its still a pointless currency that becomes utterly useless beyond a certain stage. Would seem only logical to give it a purpose. This is why it needs to be a very high figure for the conversion. As for long term players being able to convert a lot of requisition to Fleet comms because of their large amount of Fleet requisition stored up - I wouldn't worry about that. They have already done similar. If you have the right amplifiers on your character, you can loot 10K Fleet Comms in one evening of play. So it wouldn't make any difference for the long term pilots to be able to max out their fleet comms if this conversion happened. They would only be able to do it once, where as you can farm 10k Fleet comms already every evening if you wish. Honestly the amount of fleet requisition stored up pales into comparison to the already existing ways to farm Fleet Comms. But at least it would give a purpose to the currency. If the unlock price is "much higher" it defeats the purpose. How high are you proposing? 600cc? 800? 1000K. Maybe that has legs. I'd be happy for the devs to work it out. Yes a brand new toon now gets an extra ship/s unlocked, but you still have to master it. You're not at an advantage. Yes its player power in the sense that its a 2nd copy which can be useful, but that's a very minimal player power, and one a lot more people would be willing to buy into. As for the refund, yeah that's just not going to happen. I remember seeing people moaning when Nico Okarr was given away free to subscribers a few years ago, and the founders were complaining that it was no longer an exclusive founder reward. Things change. You're either thinking about other people here or you're not. 12k games, approaching 3 years play time, I haven't changed my mind and won't. Thought it from the start, and I think it now. I can get behind the alternate versions though. I mean, really? What better need is there for a petition? Bugs that have not been fixed in over 3 years. I'm all ears for other ideas, but its not like these bugs have not been reported through the bug reports system.So, give me another idea for how we get these bugs fixed.We tried siting on our hands and moaning about it. That didn't work. Sorry for the sarcasm here, but come on....

I added nothing of my own originality. Everything is stuff I have seen from other posts and comments, or what I know from talking to other pilots. If someone adds their "agree" it becomes their voice too. Is a petition submitted to parliament (which happens quite often) the voice of just one person? This is semantics. . You're assuming a lot here. Willing to bet I have more Cartel Ships on more characters than you. Willing to show you the numbers too. You can buy an outfit or a weapon from the cartel market and unlock it for 400cc. That is a cosmetic item. Cartel ships are a cosmetic item. They are functionally identical in every way to the standard versions. There is no reason why they shouldn't be in collections. What you're basically saying is that you would be salty because you spent the money and won't get it back. I am thinking of others, who would like to spend the money but wont until its legacy wide. Right or wrong here comes down to what the devs think is the best business decision. If unlocking the ships in collections will prompt more players to buy them and hence more profits for Bioware, you can bet your bottom dollar they will do it. If they believe it won't, then they won't. Inaccurate analogy. You just told me to spend 1000cc on 40 charecters (40kcc) to work around the deselect bug by transferring them all, resulting in me needing to leave my guilds and then re-transfer them back to the desired server, for another 40Kcc. No, I won't be saying thanks. You see, this is why we have a petition. Because stuff in the ground game gets fixed and updated where as GSF does not. You just said it. Iokath was over 3 years ago. So while you are happy to sit back and assume that one day we will get some new GSF content and that the bugs that have been around years will get fixed, I am not. I would rather put our voices together and nudge the devs politely. Devs, please note this. What would you propose? How would you get stuff done? Because everyone wants a new map, everyone wants bugs fixed, but no one has ever done anything to try to get stuff done. OR we can just resume sitting on our hands for the next three years then moaning again about no new content while ground pvp gets another new map and pve gets another new Flashpoint. When has there ever been another petition? I did one for remote slicing. The devs liked the community feedback, it worked, we got the job done. Name another time there has been a petiion? You will never get everyone agreeing. The world doesn't work like that. What we have here is the hope that the majority agree and hence the devs see an incentive to make the changes to keep people logging in and spending their money and time on the game. Its all business. Nothing more. It would be a lot worse to have multiple petitions. Fact is, we have multiple bugs that have never been fixed since before I joined GSF. We haven't had a new map in over 3 years. And the other revisions I hope / believe would be well received. Fact is if GSF received the kind of regular attention the ground game got, there would be no need for a multi-point petition. The petition will tell. GSF is in need of some attention and if we do nothing it will remain that way. What your "dissent" essentially comes down to - aside from disagreement with a couple of the minor points - is that you agree by and large with what is being asked for, but you disagree with asking for it. Noted.

If you like I will add a "disagree" option to the petition. I honestly never thought of it because there are persistent threads asking for this and that on here regularly. None of those things in the petition were my ideas. They are all things I have seen people ask for and by and large comments in agreement with. Seems only logical to put it into one place and try to lobby the devs for some updates to GSF, which we both know won't happen otherwise. People moaned about the state of slicing for years, devs never did anything. One petition, and its fixed. You and I both know GSF will be neglected unless we gently push for it. You disagree, that's fine. You do you. There is nothing wrong with trying to make a collective voice heard. Who is demanding? Its a polite request. Devs didn't get offended at the last one. They even chimed in and said, "great discussion here." Funny thing, they chimed in on the discussion thread, not the petition itself, because they can read more than one thread. I am not going to repeat myself. Again, not my idea, but I agree with it. You don't, That's fine. Safe to say you are in the minority on this one. I've heard complaints about cartels ships not being legacy wide probably as much as I heard complaints about slicing pre-nerf. We'll just have to agree to disagree. A work around for a bug that has been rather ignored? No thanks. How about just fix it. A petition for a bug that has been ignored? Yep, you bet. Wow, look! We agree! Sort of. Yes it does manage better with more players. Still a hot mess though. Seems to be an ideal subject of a petition. I was prepared for this response from "somebody." So, I will add disagree option on the petition. That's fair. As for the rest of it, we don't see it the same way. I'm happy to leave it there. Petition remains.Your voice has been noted, I am certain the devs will see your "dissent."

I think this is covered by opening up GSF Cosmetics to be able to be purchased with Fleet Commendations.

I'm no tech head either. My files are MP4 and I also use the same software. That one is beyond me. Maybe someone else knows.

Agreed.

First off, please not do discuss this petition here. I have made a dedicated thread to discuss it, which you can find >>>>>>>>>>>>HERE<<<<<<<<<<<< If needs be I can amend the petition based on feedback from the discussion thread. Second. If you agree with the petition, please just type "Agreed", and then rate the thread five stars. Do nothing else. Do not make comments or give feedback in this thread. If you disagree, please write "Disagreed", and then make your reasons known in the discussion thread. We know from previous experience that a clear petition with lots of "yes" votes that is also rated 5 stars, will get the attention of the devs. The primary objective of this petition is to get a new map for GSF and potentially a new mode The new mode could be Fleet Battles, where your team has to capture the enemy capital ship whilst protecting your own, or it could be a King of the Hill / Capture a point type mode, where occupying a zone accrues points and kills of different types award different points. To be frankly honest, at this point we would be quite happy with a new Domination or TDM map. But I mention the other modes in hope it will get the creative juices flowing. Based on things that have been mentioned in other threads on this forum, this petition also requests: More GSF related Decorations - let the devs iron out the particulars of this. Currency conversions and spending- Fleet comms able to purchase Cosmetics for GSF, or even unrelated things to GSF. More ways to spend ever increasing fleet comms, even if the price is steep. You have to grind Fleet Comms for that paint job - that's fair. Also maybe Fleet Requisition conversion to Fleet Comms? This would be a token conversion. In other words it would take hundreds of thousands of Fleet Requisition to convert to a moderate amount of Fleet Comms. For example off the top of my head, 100k FR converts to 350 FC. But at least you can then do something with your Fleet Requisition, which currently is useless once all ships are mastered. Bind purchases if you don't want to affect the market. Legacy unlock for Cartel ships - I trust the Devs to determine the particulars of this if they feel its a good idea. I appreciate that a simple 400cc unlock feels bad for some people who already have these ships multiple times. I feel a middle ground can be found. Co-pilot actor's voices not bound to specific abilities. So we can have the audio companion of our choice with the co-pilot ability of our choice. We all have our favorite companions, and we all have our favorite co-pilot abilities. Would be nice if these were separate rather than being forced to use a certain co-pilot voice because you need that co-pilot ability. Alternately make duplicate version of each companion with a different set of passives and abilities. Again, I'm sure the devs can come up with a suitable idea. Bugs fixed Tier 4&5 component de-select bug - fixed. Crew passives icons no longer appears on right hand side - fixed. Improve matchmaker. We appreciate its near on impossible to have balanced matches all the time, but improving matchmaker so that it forms teams based on skill - stats - rather than flying time and requisition earned, would go a long way to making a lot of people happier. This would be the biggest change to GSF since the big meta changing 5.5 patch, if we ask for all of this. So it really would need your collective support. If there is something you think I have missed or you want to make comments, please make those comments on the discussion thread,>>>>Link<<<<, not here. Many thanks.

Please discuss anything related to the petition here, not on the actual petition. Many thanks.

Subscribed. What format do you record games in? I rarely get a video that goes over 1GB.

A classic match from my archives. Been pruning my channel and going to post a few classic games. This one is from September 2020, and is still to date one of the best games I have been in. At the time I was decent in a Scout but not as good as I am now. I don't mind admitting that at the time I didn't fancy my chances contesting nodes against Yui, so I chose to go off-node clearing instead. Looking back at this match now, I can see lots of things I could've done to win it. Playing Scout for one, but even still, things I could've done in the Strike. Hero of the match goes to Yui, who glued himself to nodes, and was in a T2S that wasn't even mastered.

Charged plating is awful. Really really awful. Charged plating is another component that on the surface looks great. "Damage reduction increased by 60%." What could be bad about that? Surely that's a no brainer? Nope. Damage Reduction, whether from Charged plating or from crew choices, does not work against any weapon that has armor piercing. In the current meta, those weapons are Proton torpedoes, EMP missiles, Concussion missiles, Heavy Laser Cannons, Burst Laser Canons, Rapid Fire Laser Cannons, and Slug rail guns. In other words, all the most commonly used weapons in the game. About the only weapons Charged plating does work against, are Clusters, Light Laser Canons, Quad Laser Canons, and drones and mines. What this means is that virtually every ship in the game is running armor piercing in some form or another, and most of the damage you take in every game is going to be from armor piercing weapons. Here is a to another of Drakolich's videos that show this visually for those that need it. I see a lot of Bombers and Strikes running this, and all of them assuming that its reducing the damage they are taking. I even see them activate it when I start shooting at them. With my armor piercing weapons. I recently spoke to one guy I saw in a game who was using Charged Plating on his Starguard. He was happy to accept help and we got on really well. He claimed he was winning most jousts because he has Charged Plating equipped. But what is actually happening is that he is winning most jousts in-spite of charged plating, because he is simply better than most of his opponents. If he equipped QCS or Directionals, he would instantly see his game play improve from not having a handicapped ship. And that's what this post is about. Getting better by making better simple choices, without having to worry about learning advanced skills.

Fortress Shield is awful. Really really awful. A visual explanation works best with this one, so here is a explanation of what I am about to say here. All I am doing here is repeating what Drakolich covered to try to increase awareness. Fortress shield will add 130% to your shields. But when you deactivate it, it will remove 130% from your shields, regardless of how much shields you had left. So if you are at 100% shields, you activate Fortress shield so you go to 230%. You tank the damage from that Strike or Scout that is attacking you. Now lets say you took 100 damage. Easy to do for a good player. You now have 130% left. You start to think, "hey, I'm taking too much damage here", so you decide to move. Fortress shield will now remove the 130% it gave you. Leaving you at a big fat zero shields. I see people do this all the time. But, even if it didn't do this, at max 230% shields, it only takes a second or so longer to burn you down. If you take a Proton hit while its active, all that damage from the Proton will bypass your Fortress shields, because that's what Protons do, and you still die. Don't forget you are sitting still, so locking a Proton or burning you with lasers could not be easier. The only situation where Fortress shields works, is if you are jousting another Gunship. So you are both facing each other, with clear line of sight, and you are both charging and firing rail guns until one of you dies. In that situation it will beat the meta choice component Distortion field. And I know what yo're thinking, that's good right? Fortress shield is good? No, its not. Distortion Field is better for literally every other situation, and you really shouldn't be trying to slug it out with another Gunship face to face with clear open line of sight, because even if you win, you are still going to take chip damage. Chip damage adds up and eventually you die. But, this gets into a whole different topic of how to fly Gunships. Even if you equip Fortress shield thinking you'll just use it to joust other Gunships, it will let you down at every other time. Try to use it against a Strike that attacks you, you die. I appreciate a lot of people use it because it's stock equipment or because on paper it sounds great, but as soon as you can you should be upgrading to the meta best choice component for Gunships, which is Distortion Field.

Use of Repair Drones Always spec your repair drone to refill ammunition. I see a lot of repair drones with shield regeneration selected. This has next to no value. Shields regenerate themselves already. Having a repair drone regenerate your shields just gets it done slightly faster. Ammo refill on the other hand has a lot of value. Any Ace Scout Pilot will thank you for having ammo refill. And considering how many missiles are being fired in any given match, think how much you help your team by having a way to refill.