Current capture mechanic heavily favors using Burst Laser Cannons

[Nemarus]

That is why I prefer the Ocula with burst lasers - not because it is the best at circling satellites both defensively and offensively, but because it is the fighter most capable of quickly and unpredictably changing the rules of engagement, with the weapons to kill enemies who do not recognize these changes equally quickly.

 

You've essentially agreed with my points.

 

You agree Domination is won and loss at satellites.

 

You use Burst Cannons to maximize your ability to get quick, decisive kills in close combat. Why? Because they are the only weapon that can. I've been trying since October, in closed beta, to figure out some surefire way to drive even mildly competent players away from a satellite while flying solo. The "go vertical" trick was quickly obvious, but even then, with maxed out quads and cluster missiles, a competent target has no problem flipping to the other side of the satellite and breaking LOS again.

 

And against a skilled player, it was always a stalemate--which benefits the defender.

 

But then I discovered Burst Lasers. With them, I could easily sweep aside unskilled orbiters, and I could feasibly defeat more skilled players if I outflew them (i.e. by "changing the rules of engagement"). Either way, Burst Lasers let me capitalize on my superior skill.

 

Again, my point is not that they are broken. My point is that they are obviously designed to be superior close combat weapons, and Domination is obviously designed to reward close combat play.

 

If it was a simple deathmatch, you'd never take burst cannons. You'd take heavies and max them out for range, so that you could engage foes at 6900m and kill them before they know what's happening.

 

Nor am I arguing for a simplification of the rules. All I want is a tweak to the capture space such that Burst Cannons aren't such an obvious choice--and more importantly, so that players who care about winning with a PUG don't feel like it is always up to them to be the one circling on the node.

[Helig]

Specialized weapons are specialized. It's like complaining that dumbfire rockets can 2-shoot turrets, or that ion cannons decimate shields.

[Nemarus]

Specialized weapons are specialized. It's like complaining that dumbfire rockets can 2-shoot turrets, or that ion cannons decimate shields.

 

Yes, specialized weapons are specialized. That's fine. The problem is when a gametype disproportionately rewards use of a particular specialized weapon.

 

And to your point about rockets--every ship has at least one weapon (or more) that can one or two shot turrets when upgraded with armor piercing. These weapons can all do it once upgraded with armor piercing:

 

Rockets

Heavy Laser Cannons

Burst Laser Cannons

Slug Railgun

Concussion Missiles

Proton Torpedoes

 

As for Ion Cannons, they have a specialized use against ships with heavy shields, yes. But that would be true on any map, on any gametype. There's nothing about Domination that makes Ion Cannons more or less useful.

 

Now perhaps future gametypes will reward long range or objective-killing gameplay. But still, when Domination pops, a disproportionate number of people will be running BLC builds.

 

The interesting wrinkle there is that, since you cannot ready one ship type more than once (a Sting with quads and a Sting with burst cannons, for example), you'll end up having to commit a particular ship type to be the one you use on Domination and potentially nowhere else (if BLC's aren't useful on the capital ship assault gametype, for example).

[Helig]

Yes, specialized weapons are specialized. That's fine. The problem is when a gametype disproportionately rewards use of a particular specialized weapon.

I think you're grossly exaggerating. Railguns "disproportionately" award floating back and shooting from long range. Heavy lasers "disproportionately" award tailing a target at mid range. Missiles "disproportionately" award stacking.

 

Yes, objectives in Domination encourage tight floating, and burst lasers suit very well for destroying humpers. But so are railguns, as well as cluster missiles. The only scenario I feel disadvantaged at when humpers are concerned is having midrange lasers (like quad) as my main cannons.

[Nemarus]

I think you're grossly exaggerating. Railguns "disproportionately" award floating back and shooting from long range. Heavy lasers "disproportionately" award tailing a target at mid range. Missiles "disproportionately" award stacking.

 

Yes, objectives in Domination encourage tight floating, and burst lasers suit very well for destroying humpers. But so are railguns, as well as cluster missiles. The only scenario I feel disadvantaged at when humpers are concerned is having midrange lasers (like quad) as my main cannons.

 

Which is exactly my point. Thanks. Domination is decided by close combat. Mid and long range weapons are less useful because of it.

[Helig]

Which is exactly my point. Thanks. Domination is decided by close combat. Mid and long range weapons are less useful because of it.

Humpers are railgun fodder. Railguns aren't a close-range weapon. Flying patterns are very predictable, speeds are low, area of movement severely limited. Perfect target practice. They either die, or confound their maneuvers to the opposite hemisphere, which makes them perfect victims for anything that approaches from this direction, no matter the weapons.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Helig

[Rigsta]

A supporting gunship with an ion cannon is hard to predict and can lock down multiple defenders with a single shot.

I unlocked the AE-damage tier of the ion railgun last night and absolutely love it. Choosing between the 2 final upgrades is going to be tough, both seem equally crippling (40% snare/stop regen for 6s). I'm wondering if they affect each target or just the main one too.

 

@OP: I certainly use burst lasers on my gunship (turns like a whale = wide firing arc good) but if I don't have to be the one diving onto the satellite the railguns do a much better job of clearing it.

 

On-topic: I don't agree the capture radius needs to increase. And that has nothing to do with weapons, I just like the way it works now - you can't expect to solo a satellite, precisely because you have to be close to cap it and it's hard to do decisive damage to the defenders at that distance.

[Nemarus]

I just want to point out---I posted this back in early December, shortly after GSF soft-launched. Some said I was jumping to conclusions...

 

... at least on my server, half of every match is made up of Stings or Flashfires with Burst Cannons. A team that does not have them simply won't be able to dislodge orbiters / EvasionTurrets easily enough to flip satellites.

 

It remains to be seen if Bombers counter BLC's ... or if BLC's end up being less useful in Deathmatch. Even so, it's a shame that an entire gametype (Domination) requires a particular component to be used to be successful in competitive play.

[-Shadowfist-]

IEven so, it's a shame that an entire gametype (Domination) requires a particular component to be used to be successful in competitive play.

 

You can slot 5 ships. If you can't present to the warfront with numerous builds for numerous instances of engagement, you don't really deserve to win.

[DroidDreamer]

Wait to till bombers get here. Burst Lasers won't be the big problem on the node.

[Sharee]

If there is just a single attacker against a single defender, and both are closely orbiting the sat, then yes, burst cannon is the way to go. But if there is just one more attacker, say, a pike, then that pike can sit on the side away from the sat, and while his teammate stays orbiting closely to prevent cap, the pike kills the defender.

 

Increasing the cap range would not change much in a 1 vs 1 scenario. You could get away from the sat in a pike to get better shot, but the defender could counter by simply stopping at the other side of the sat.

 

Capping a sat on your own againt a lone defender is simply the job for a scout, not for a pike.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Sharee

[silvershadows]

Nemarus writes a thread about scouts being overpowered?

 

He must be awake.

 

Fixed that for you.

Edited January 24, 2014 by silvershadows

[Armonddd]

You can slot 5 ships. If you can't present to the warfront with numerous builds for numerous instances of engagement, you don't really deserve to win.

 

This would be the ideal... if there were a lot more requisition being thrown around. As it is, there's always going to be sub-optimal ship setups on both sides, punishing new players as well as those who don't recognize which components are good in what fights. The one is good, the other is not.

 

Oh, and it's still dumb and poor design that one component is so vastly superior to the others. It's called a dominant strategy, and those kill games.

[Brewski]

As a Flashfire pilot who has three of the four blaster types mastered (and Quads in the works), I can say that ultimately which one you use is a matter of play preference.

 

Rapid Fires fully mastered are fun, especially with a Frequency Capacitor and Mastered Overcharge. The "hose" build gives you long sustained firepower, and is probably best for people who aren't such a great shot, since you can just kind of spray blasters everywhere. Personally, my assist count doubled and my kill count dropped by half while flying with this.

 

Burst Cannons heavily favor those who are fairly accurate shots, since it packs all of it's damage into a short package. If you hit, it's powerful, but you need to be pretty good at aiming. They are a tad overpowered at the moment I think, and probably need an adjustment down in damage eventually. Given the short range and heavy damage per shot, they are definitely best for clearing/defending nodes when orbiting.

 

Lights fit between the two, requiring a bit more accuracy than Rapids, but being a bit more forgiving than Burst. I assume Quads would fit between Lights and Burst in that equation as well.

 

That said, I think node defending and clearing is going to change a lot when bombers hit. Scouts are currently king of node orbiting, and that makes Flashfire/Sting builds with BLC's the FOTM. However, once bombers are able to lay minefields and place turrets around nodes, I think that will change. Ships with EMP missiles mounted will be needed to clear nodes, and the higher sustained fire-rate and longer ranged blasters will be more attractive when you need to remove mines and drones before you can get close. Also, heavier damage output will be needed to take out the actual bombers as well, so I think Strikes and Gunships will again become more prevalent.

[Nemarus]

Fixed that for you.

 

Funny, my first mastered ship was a Sting. My next best ships are my Blackbolt and Flashfire. I have no problem with Scouts. They are my favorite ship to fly (but I do try to fly everything, unlike many other pilots).

 

My problem is with the fact that it seems like 90% of the best pilots exclusively use Stings/Flashfires with Distortion Field and Burst Laser Cannons in any competitive match. And when I try to use any other build (Scout or not), it's a struggle to clear nodes because of my lack of BLC's.

 

There is nothing inherently wrong with Scouts. The only issue I see is that the requirements of Domination heavily favor the use of one particular build--and the proof is in the pudding. Stings and Flashfires are everywhere, and they aren't running Directional or Quick-charge shields, nor are they wielding Light or Rapid Lasers. Even Quads are rare. The overwhelming majority of pilots have learned that BLC's are the key to victory.

 

If I'd seen you ever fly anything but your DF/BLC Flashfire, I might take your opinion on balance more seriously. Or if you actually tried to reply to the enumerated points in my original post, rather than just look for the first weeks-old troll response and glomp onto it in a lame attempt at defending your crutch build.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[silvershadows]

 

If I'd seen you ever fly anything but your DF/BLC Flashfire, I might take your opinion on balance more seriously. Or if you actually tried to reply to the enumerated points in my original post, rather than just look for the first weeks-old troll response and glomp onto it in a lame attempt at defending your crutch build.

 

 

When I'm flying against you, of course I'm flying my Flashfire. I know you typically come with a premade, and I'm not going to play one of my other ships that I'm not comfortable in just to make you happy.

 

I often fly my Pike and my Quarrel, and will likely be switching between the Flashfire and Pike after the new modes/bombers come in depending on how many bombers we are forced to deal with in each fight.

 

Also - I have every single component for my Flashfire maxed out, and have been known to enter matches with quads and booster recharge over BLC/Blaster Overcharge.

 

I also exclusively fly a Pike when I am on my sage, Tranquility.

 

What my statement was meant to point out is you complain a lot. Actually, all the time. And you complain almost exclusively about Scouts (distortion field, burst lasers) and gunships (ion love tap). The only thing that you rightfully complain about is the ion love tap. Scouts will no longer dominate once deathmatch and bombers are released. You are asking for nerfs to a class when the entire game hasn't even been released yet.

 

Wait until bombers are out, wait until Death Match has been released. THEN, if there is still an issue with BLC/DF etc, THEN you can write these long posts calling for a nerf.

 

Be patient. Also, I rarely see you fly anything other than a strike fighter nowadays, which seems to have prompted the majority of your complaints. In the current game setup, where we only have one battle mode and two maps, Strike Fighters are not quite as competitive. Them's just the breaks. However, I have seen quite a few strike fighter pilots who are able to give me and my friends a run for our money, and get right up there with damage and kills.

 

In other words, calm the heck down and wait. We have only a short time before the game is expanded upon, and that will be the appropriate time to assess and address imbalance.

 

PS - I've also been told it would be a travesty for me to fly anything other than a Flashfire, a sentiment echoed by my guildles every time I get into another ship.

[Nemarus]

 

In other words, calm the heck down and wait. We have only a short time before the game is expanded upon, and that will be the appropriate time to assess and address imbalance.

 

PS - I've also been told it would be a travesty for me to fly anything other than a Flashfire, a sentiment echoed by my guildles every time I get into another ship.

 

1) This post was made weeks ago, when the game first started, and we knew we'd be stuck exclusively with Domination. I just wanted to point out that my concerns then totally turned out to be true (and if you look at my OP, I wasn't asking for changes to components, but for changes to capture range).

 

2) That your guildies tell you that, or that when fighting against me you "of course" fly your Flashfire--isn't that indication that there's a problem here?

 

You see me in a Strike of late because I've been trying to find some build--any build--that can compete/counter the BLC/DF Scout. I was hoping a mix of Heavy Laser Cannons stacked for accuracy, and Cluster Missiles would work. They haven't. Trust me, the last thing I want to fly Imp-side is a Strike--I absolutely loathe their appearance.

 

But I also loathe being forced to play a single build because "anything else would be a travesty". And that's what it's like in Domination. It may well be like that in Deathmatch too. These same scouts which dominate at satellites may just abuse DF to get close to their opponents in order to Burst them.... and few opponents will be able to effectively flee and put distance between themselves and a Scout.

 

The only class that really has a chance of winning, once a Burst Scout targets it, is a Minelayer. And that's a big maybe.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[Brewski]

...

 

Scouts will no longer dominate once deathmatch and bombers are released. You are asking for nerfs to a class when the entire game hasn't even been released yet.

 

Wait until bombers are out, wait until Death Match has been released. THEN, if there is still an issue with BLC/DF etc, THEN you can write these long posts calling for a nerf.

 

...

 

In other words, calm the heck down and wait. We have only a short time before the game is expanded upon, and that will be the appropriate time to assess and address imbalance.

 

...

 

This is my stance as well. Knowing the game is still in it's early stage of release, and won't be available to everyone for another 10 days, and knowing additional game changing content (bombers/death match) is just around the corner, advocating for severe changes to the system is premature.

 

Not that balance shouldn't be considered even now, because it should. Changes, however, need to be small and only to address the most severe problems. The changes they are making to try and address the ion love tap, for example, are a great example of doing balancing right.

 

I'm not saying that BLC, DF or even BO don't need to be looked at, as I think they probably do. But to continuously rage about the lack of major nerfs isn't very productive.

 

There are some good discussions here about all of these, and I think the devs are paying attention, and we will see tweaks come down the line as the game progresses. None of the above abilities rise to the level of "game breaking" though, so everyone needs to have a little more patience.

[silvershadows]

 

2) That your guildies tell you that, or that when fighting against me you "of course" fly your Flashfire--isn't that indication that there's a problem here?

 

 

 

No, it's an indication that I'm a good Flashfire pilot. I fully intend to continue flying the Flashfire even if it is hit with nerfs, because 1) It's an A-wing, and 2) I enjoy it. In fact, the exact words used were, "It'd be a tragedy for you to fly anything else, you're too good at the Flashfire."

 

Personally, I don't see that - I think I'm decent to mediocre, and pilots like Nailin/Andern and Kvikorma blow me out of the water (or out of space, if you will.)

 

They also say it's a travesty because I play a smuggler - a crassly speaking, bad-***, speed-loving smuggler with an attitude. To fly anything other than a Flashfire would also be out of character, yet I still do it to boost my Pike/Quarrel up since sitting on 200k requisition on my Flashfire with nothing to spend it on kind of sucks.

 

 

There's quite a few things about GSF I think need some tweaking. But I'm not going to sit and analyze or call for nerfs when the whole game isn't out yet.

Edited January 24, 2014 by silvershadows

[Ramalina]

A far as dealing with people close orbiting a sat goes, all you really need is two people in either strikes or heavy scouts to do a vertical pincher maneuver.

 

With one shooting from above, and one shooting from below a sat offers no cover at all, and circlers are almost as easy to hit as the people that park under sats. I find quads and heavies to be ideal for this.

 

You capture the sat after shooting them down or panicking them into ramming an obstacle. There's a delay for turret spawning, so it's not that much of an issue if they have free run of the sat for a few seconds.

 

Where the short cap range is really going to make thing interesting is with bombers. It's probably going to almost completely kill off the close orbit strategy for holding sats.

[Nemarus]

A far as dealing with people close orbiting a sat goes, all you really need is two people in either strikes or heavy scouts to do a vertical pincher maneuver.

 

With one shooting from above, and one shooting from below a sat offers no cover at all, and circlers are almost as easy to hit as the people that park under sats. I find quads and heavies to be ideal for this.

 

You capture the sat after shooting them down or panicking them into ramming an obstacle. There's a delay for turret spawning, so it's not that much of an issue if they have free run of the sat for a few seconds.

 

Where the short cap range is really going to make thing interesting is with bombers. It's probably going to almost completely kill off the close orbit strategy for holding sats.

 

I can do that, using text or voice to coordinate with other team members.... possibly taking several passes.

 

... or I can fly a Burst Laser Cannon scout and clear them out myself in a fourth of the time/effort.

[silvershadows]

The easiest way to make people panic is to start spamming a missile lock, as in tapping the button very quickly, over and over.

 

Many pilots who don't have very good situational awareness will take the shrilling of the alarms to mean they are being locked on to by multiple pilots and will then freak out. I've gotten several satellite circlers to self-destruct with this method in the past couple days.

 

It's also very good for a laugh.

[Itkovian]

Personally I don't think there's any doubt that right now, as things stand, the Flashfire/Sting w/ BLCs and DF are the best build in the game.

 

Nemarus' point is basically what works best floats to the top, and it certainly has. The combination of evasion, DF cooldown, speed and maneuverability, and the superb burst potential of BLCs (plus BLCs also happens to get shield peircing ON TOP of the most burst damage, for some deranged reason) along with the system cooldowns makes the Flashfire/Sting the best ship for GSF as it stands.

 

That's just how it is, and we've definitely seen that build rise to the top.

 

The real question is how it'll work out once bombers are in. The main weakness to the scouts are evasion-proof weapons, and that's where missiles and mines come in handy. Missiles are pretty meh right now (and of course DF can break missile lock, because Reasons). Plus Scout firepower is short ranged, which is perfect for bombers.

 

So I say let's wait for bombers and TDM, but the devs definitely needed to be made aware of this imbalance, so this thread and others serve a good purpose. What they decide to do with that information is up to them, of course.

[Brewski]

Personally I don't think there's any doubt that right now, as things stand, the Flashfire/Sting w/ BLCs and DF are the best build in the game.

 

Nemarus' point is basically what works best floats to the top, and it certainly has. The combination of evasion, DF cooldown, speed and maneuverability, and the superb burst potential of BLCs (plus BLCs also happens to get shield peircing ON TOP of the most burst damage, for some deranged reason) along with the system cooldowns makes the Flashfire/Sting the best ship for GSF as it stands.

 

That's just how it is, and we've definitely seen that build rise to the top.

 

The real question is how it'll work out once bombers are in. The main weakness to the scouts are evasion-proof weapons, and that's where missiles and mines come in handy. Missiles are pretty meh right now (and of course DF can break missile lock, because Reasons). Plus Scout firepower is short ranged, which is perfect for bombers.

 

So I say let's wait for bombers and TDM, but the devs definitely needed to be made aware of this imbalance, so this thread and others serve a good purpose. What they decide to do with that information is up to them, of course.

This. Exactly this.

 

Once bombers are in, satellite humping is going to be a whole different game, and BLCs will become the second best weapon for clearing a satellite behind a mine-to-the-face from a bomber. Node defense and attack will be very different.

 

It doesn't mean that BLCs and other components won't need adjusting, but it could make a dramatic difference in how far they need to be adjusted. Patience.