Just buff the strike fighter.

[elthenar]

Scouts do need to be toned down. Maybe the bombers will be the counter that they need, but I can not see a logical reason for a scout ship to be simultaneously the best dogfighter, have a 6 second immunity and more than enough speed to get into that dogfight and have the massive damage to quickly end a dogfight and move on.

[Altheran]

I wouldn't disregard any buff to the engines for the Strike.

 

I don't know about aeronautics logic, but I would still give the edge of speed to Scouts. After all, even though they have big thrusters, they are also heavier.

 

But I'd really like to have a much better engine energy management... Because what is outrageous at the moment is that if you busted a gunship you may never catch him, because you use a good part of your engine power just to approach him, and if he succed to get away from you with a barrel roll, good luck catching him again.

 

I know a Gunship player that can succeed to make me try to catch him nearly endlessly. I can sometime land him one or two shots and a conc missile, but most of the damge only go to shields. In the end it results to who had been interrupted by a third party first. Once engaged in the chase, I have no turn back, if I happen to abandon the chase, I'm shot down.

 

---

 

That aside, there's one thing I'd like very much to be improved : the target acquiring of missiles.

 

We probably all have experienced to have an apparently successful lock to not fire when near of the boundaries of aiming.

The devs said it was due to game proceeding to server inquiries to verify the lock, and due to the difference of lag that makes what appeared as a legit lock for us, appears as an out of reach lock for the server, hence refusing the launching.

 

But I think the system is too rigid. Server rules as they are now, don't seem to consider the fact that us, players do not have real time information, hence we are not able to play the game to it's fullest with these rigid rules.

I'm not asking of removing the security systems of the game, but to allow an error margin when firing.

That would consist of allowing the launch of a missile to someone "out of range" by a few hundreds meters. (100 or 200) And maybe an arc error margin could be nice too...

After all why are we punished because what appeared as 6800m is actually 7100 server side ? (Conc missiles range : 7000m)

 

And think of ground battlegrounds. The error margin exists there. Don't tell me I am not the only one to have experienced to cast an ability with 30m range, to see the target going to the 31-32m range maybe 0.1or 0.2s before the end of the cast, and having it fire in the end.

 

Why in ground battleground we have a system that allows us to fire things even though we did see the target go beyond the limit at the last time, and in space we couldn't even fire thing while they appear still okay to us ?

It's frustrating.

If only it were just frustrating...

...but it also cuts down a good part of our performance, us the strike fighters who rely a lot on those big missiles of ours. These lock fails can happen 5-10 times per battle, some of these could mean a ennemy dead, and one ally alive, and could change the domination of a satellite.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Altheran

[Nethgilne]

I like the idea of giving a faster speed. Perhaps they could balance it by giving strikes the highest base speed (i mean seriously they have huge engines then better be generating a ton of thrust), but make scouts faster then strikes when boosting. Give strikes the fastest engine power regen (seriously massive engines) but give allow scouts to boost longer than strikes (if they chose the ability).

 

Also remover the increased sped from barrel roll... It should be an evasion skill not a transportation device not gape closer. I will miss it dearly on all my ships but its hard to pick any other evasion ability when barrel roll is so necessary to move from node to node on a slow strike.

 

I think the fastest top speed can go to scouts. But SF should have the longer endurance.

[-Streven-]

I dont think anyone has commented on this yet but im fairly certain the reason you can hit anything at close range is due to lag-compensation not an accuracy drop off. Its the same as when using say proton torps at close range (good example as the firing arc is so small) against another ship. You may keep the ship dead centered in the circle on your screen but suddenly lose the lock or why you lock missiles and take your finger off the button just before the ship leaves the firing arc but the missile never fires.

 

Different game similar concept...

Though swtor seems to use server side hit detection.. I know missiles require a server check before they fire.

 

Ive pulled up behind gs and been 200 meters away and for a split non of my shots land but then suddenly they start getting nailed by 100% of me shots.

 

If this is why blasters are so hard to use at short range as i suspect it is. Then it will never get better and never change.

 

I think the up close problem is mainly due to the hitbox not growing appropriately not latency.

[Zoom_VI]

I think the fastest top speed can go to scouts. But SF should have the longer endurance.

 

^^this

 

The biggest problem I have with my strike is I have just enough engine power to get somewhere but once I am there I don't have enough power to do anything. Strikes should have significantly larger base engine pools than they do.

[-Streven-]

First, I love the idea of giving strikers more boost endurance.

 

Another potential buff to the starguard might be to have both primaries on separate energy pools. Essentially non stop lasers. I would even allow them to passively recharge slowly even when not selected. That would differentiate the class and give you a reason to switch primaries on the starguard. It doesn't give you the burst people are looking for but does some interesting things to resource management. Just a thought. Not sure of a comparable buff to the pike yet.

[Verain]

If the Starguard got that, presumably the Quarrel would too!

 

It's actually surprising that there is only one power pool when you consider that the Pike certainly doesn't have to share ammo space. Aka, it's not like you only get half as many clusters and half as many torps.

[Flearos]

Would just like to point out that massive engines literally means massive amounts of ship to move.

 

True but the larger engine means increased thrust and thus a better weight to thrust ratio.

 

 

Disagree. Gap closing/opening utility is what makes barrel roll not bad (the way literally every other missile break skill but retro is).

 

You just proved my point, its too good and because of that there is zero reason to pick anything else. Afterburners should be your gap closer perhaps they need to be more effective.

[Verain]

Well, everyone uses barrel roll to do anything.

 

I think the only nerf needed is that barrel roll should have a slightly higher cooldown than the others. Right now it is really hard to justify taking KT and even RT, which has some good utility in a fight, is overshadowed.

[Armonddd]

True but the larger engine means increased thrust and thus a better weight to thrust ratio.

 

If this were true, space shuttles would bring infinite fuel with them on their trips beyond the moon.

 

You just proved my point, its too good and because of that there is zero reason to pick anything else. Afterburners should be your gap closer perhaps they need to be more effective.

 

No. The problem is that snap turn, power dive, and koiogran turn do nothing special, that is to say, nothing that you can't do without sufficient turning and throttle manipulation. There is absolutely reason to pick something other than barrel roll: retro thrusters have landed me literally hundreds of kills that would otherwise not have been possible, even against skilled pilots.

 

You pick barrel roll if you want to move from place to place quickly. You pick retro thrusters if you want killing power and snap-turn utility. You pick anything else that breaks missile locks if you don't have the dexterity to make your ship perform that action on your own, and you pick the ones that don't break missile locks if you're simply feeling suicidal.

[elthenar]

Wanna buff the strike fighter? Let em shoot both lasers at once!

 

Oh, and nerf the hell out of evasion tanking. Distortion lolfield is just silly.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

^^this

 

The biggest problem I have with my strike is I have just enough engine power to get somewhere but once I am there I don't have enough power to do anything. Strikes should have significantly larger base engine pools than they do.

 

I would be all for that. Presumably a ship that big can fit a much larger engine generator anyway.

 

Something I'd also like to see: give both striker types access to the armor and reactor components. It kinda puzzles me why the Type 2 scout gets both but the presumably tankier striker only gets one (which one depending on the model). It would give a very respectable buff to their tankiness and also (possibly) make the charged plating a more viable option for the Type 1 striker.

 

But if we follow this line of reclassification, should the scouts still be classified as scouts? What should the class be referred to as? Light fighters? Skirmishers?

 

In Star Wars lore (and most games) GSF's scout class are typically known as interceptors (the A-Wing being one of the most famous examples of this class of ship). The interceptor being more for hit and run attacks, recon, or skirmishing. GSF's strikers are in the same class as ships such as the X-Wing which fills the role of multirole starfighter that often also serves the role of space superiority due to the good dogfighting traits combined with their heavy weaponry and defenses.

 

I think for most people that have played Star Wars flight games in the past expected this sort of model to be held (the devs even suggested as much by comparing scouts to A-Wings and strikers to X-Wings). So it comes as a surprise that scouts have more powerful burst damage than strikers (if things had been kept to the normal Star Wars balance all strikers would currently have access to the offensive blaster burst damage of Type 2 scouts and all scouts would have blaster damage roughly on par with Type 1 scouts).

Edited January 24, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Flearos]

If this were true, space shuttles would bring infinite fuel with them on their trips beyond the moon.

 

And you lost me im unsure what this has to do with well anything we were discussing. A larger engine will provide more thrust. Thrust that will offset and exceed the added weight and mass of the engine.

 

Also space shuttles don't travel past the moon. Second in space all motion is perpetual if a space ship starts to move an engine, any engine, will continue to accelerate the object only difference is how fast.

 

This space combat in swtor however is based on atmosphere flight in which the removal of thrust means the loss of speed (straffing and sitting still are more like space flight). Therefore the more thrust you have the faster you can go because the trust is required to over come the friction of the air. Therefore a larger engine with more thrust will make you travel faster.

 

 

 

No. The problem is that snap turn, power dive, and koiogran turn do nothing special, that is to say, nothing that you can't do without sufficient turning and throttle manipulation. There is absolutely reason to pick something other than barrel roll: retro thrusters have landed me literally hundreds of kills that would otherwise not have been possible, even against skilled pilots.

 

You pick barrel roll if you want to move from place to place quickly. You pick retro thrusters if you want killing power and snap-turn utility. You pick anything else that breaks missile locks if you don't have the dexterity to make your ship perform that action on your own, and you pick the ones that don't break missile locks if you're simply feeling suicidal.

 

First increase the rate that koiogran turn, power dive and snap turn change the direction of your ship. Second given that these skills all have a secondary function of moving your ship in some direction your probably right that the speed boost shouldn't be removed. However it should not propel you forward faster than your afterburners. Is it a transportation skill or an evasion skill? There should be clear differences between the two.

[Altheran]

And you lost me im unsure what this has to do with well anything we were discussing. A larger engine will provide more thrust. Thrust that will offset and exceed the added weight and mass of the engine.

 

Also space shuttles don't travel past the moon. Second in space all motion is perpetual if a space ship starts to move an engine, any engine, will continue to accelerate the object only difference is how fast.

 

This space combat in swtor however is based on atmosphere flight in which the removal of thrust means the loss of speed (straffing and sitting still are more like space flight). Therefore the more thrust you have the faster you can go because the trust is required to over come the friction of the air. Therefore a larger engine with more thrust will make you travel faster.

 

You assume that these big engine will exceed the added mass inerty.

That's possible... but that's not necessarly true.

[Ramalina]

Engine mass is relatively insignificant, your increased mass penalties come primarily from hauling extra fuel. In general with the same technology base larger engines tend to have a somewhat better thrust to mass ratio because the components of the engine that don't directly contribute to increased thrust are a smaller proportion of total engine mass.

 

Larger size generally doesn't impose much of a penalty in terms of speed, and due to geometry tends to be very beneficial for range (fuel tank volume increases with the cube of the craft size, not linearly). Where the penalty shows up is in acceleration, especially turning ability. There are supersonic heavy bombers, but there aren't heavy bombers that can pull a 9g turn.

 

Of course that's for combustion based bypass turbofan engines. If you switch technologies to what are basically high volume particle accelerators with relativistic exhaust speeds those tendencies may not hold.

 

Incidentally, I really like koigran turn for fights in enclosed spaces, almost never have to worry about accidental ramming. You can also use it after boosting to set up a head to head pass much faster than you could by turning normally after the boost.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Ramalina

[Armonddd]

First increase the rate that koiogran turn, power dive and snap turn change the direction of your ship. Second given that these skills all have a secondary function of moving your ship in some direction your probably right that the speed boost shouldn't be removed. However it should not propel you forward faster than your afterburners. Is it a transportation skill or an evasion skill? There should be clear differences between the two.

 

All of the evasion skills are transportation skills. However, only two of them really send your ship in the direction you want to go - straight forward to your objective, or straight behind your target. Everything else is cute, but does things extremely precisely. The problem with computer-generated precision is you can't use a human hand to dodge complications.

 

stuff

 

Here's someone who knows what they're talking about. Listen to them, not me, I'm just giving theorycrafting (that isn't necessarily applicable to the star wars universe anyway).

 

Incidentally, I really like koigran turn for fights in enclosed spaces, almost never have to worry about accidental ramming. You can also use it after boosting to set up a head to head pass much faster than you could by turning normally after the boost.

 

Blasphemy!

 

No, seriously, I just can't stand the idea of not being in control of my craft, so I hate the U-turn.

[Ramalina]

Charge! Barrel roll

Retreat! Reverse thrusters

About face! Koigran Turn or the U-turn one (does anyone use the U-turn one?)

 

Once you press the button the ship does what it does and you have no control over it. It's just a matter of keeping track of what's in front or you and what's behind you. Only real difference between Koigran and Reverse is the direction of your shot opportunity and the distance behind you that you have to be aware of before you press the button. Same for the sideways U-turn thingy too.

 

I dislike the vertical maneuvers because without something like TrackIR support it's really hard to see what you're going to kill yourself by crashing into.

 

In short, you can't dodge the complications, you can only try to anticipate them.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Ramalina

[Zharik]

^^this

 

The biggest problem I have with my strike is I have just enough engine power to get somewhere but once I am there I don't have enough power to do anything. Strikes should have significantly larger base engine pools than they do.

 

This is a piloting error (arriving to the fight with zero engine reserves) that you need to adjust your flying to, not "The ship needs to adjust to my flying mentality"...

 

Scouts are *supposed* to be able to outrun all others, in the short term and the long term. If you want better linear speed (in racing to satellites in the initial phase, for example), take barrel roll engines.

 

Now having 2 sets of blasters is nice, and allows for situational uses that maximize a particular weapon's strengths, I'd love to see a "linked fire mode" that drains weapon energy very quickly but fires all guns. Maybe each gun's damage would be reduced by ~35%, but adding the remaining 65% to each other would yield an effective DPS of about 130% normal... (but you'd chew through energy like crazy)

Edited January 25, 2014 by Zharik

[Ramalina]

It really depends on the strike and the scout, as to which has better 'legs'.

 

If you build a Flashfire optimized for turning dogfights it's going to have range and speed that are barely better than a baseline strike fighter.

 

Take a Pike on the other hand, which really ought to stay at 12 km to 5 km from it's target, and thus doesn't need to turn in a dogfight but does need to keep enemies at the right distance. With the right build and crew you have mobility that's a bit better than the baseline Novadive. The key, as far as I can tell, is that you need to take the engine speed thruster upgrade. This is counter intuitive, because you'd think the right choice would be engine pool regen or engine pool size. However, those are small boosts to overall range. The reason speed works so well is that boost multiplies speed by 320%, and while the baseline speed increase is about the same magnitude as the other speed/range thruster upgrades, it gets that multiplier every time you boost. It makes a huge difference. I can frequently outrun Flashfires on my Pike now. Of course, I found this out by mastering all of the thruster options on my Pike, process of elimination. >.<

 

Last few matches with my 'greyhound' Pike build I've been leaving energy settings on max engine power for most of the match, keeping distance, and lobbing proton-concussion combos. It had done wonders for performance, and it's mostly based on the ability to boost about as well as a middle-of-the-pack scout.

 

Of course, there is a price to pay for this. You really have to stay away from dogfights and gunships with ion railguns because you don't really have a chance in a turning contest or if you run out of engine power.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Ramalina

[Zharik]

The key, as far as I can tell, is that you need to take the engine speed thruster upgrade. This is counter intuitive, because you'd think the right choice would be engine pool regen or engine pool size. However, those are small boosts to overall range. The reason speed works so well is that boost multiplies speed by 320%, and while the baseline speed increase is about the same magnitude as the other speed/range thruster upgrades, it gets that multiplier every time you boost. It makes a huge difference.

 

I agree with your premise but with the difficulty of keeping the slower missile locks on target with a narrow cone, I prefer the turning thrusters. Honestly with an upgraded (tier 2) barrel roll engine, I get to the satellite nearly as fast as any scout with a roll-boost-roll combo. The 10% speed boost doesn't allow them to cap it before I arrive. Granted when I get the 3rd tier of engines I might take the speed boost and get some of both worlds, but with that at least I can change it to turning if I like it better.

[Armadyil]

Hmm I saw this post and though Id hop in. I preferably fly a striker, got my Star Guard mastered, and im pretty good in them. I honestly dont know what people are talking about. "Strikers are defenders", "Strikers cant win dogfights", "Strikers are the weakest class atm" (Although this is a little true it isnt that they are bad). My PR DPS, 153, i got on the Star Guard. There are no ships i fear, just some players . I can take more beating than a scout and my burst is constant in stead of a temporary one (targeting tele or blaster overload).

 

Here's my Star Guard build: Quads, Rapid-Fire (if energy is low, although that almost never happens), Concs, Quick-Charge, Koio turn, Regen Mag, Turbo Reactor, Range Capacitator and Power Thrusters. With Co-pilot ability Bypass.

My Pike has Proton Torps and 2nd Secundary Weapon (although theyre are just bad before t4).

 

Right now (before release bombers), the only 2 ships that are better than a striker are the Flashfire/Sting and the Quarrel/Mangler, although the last is a totally different playstyle, and there soft spot is ,in fact, the striker.

 

Strikers in dogfights: The t3 engine upgrade: +10% turning rate enhances your chances greatly, but also w/o it you can win. How? Circling dogfights arent your strength, strikes (the hint's in the name) are. In a strike (flying head to head), a flurry of quad (or other) lasers accompanied by a t5 concussion missile (and they are easy to lock on!) takes pretty much all enemies down, except when they hit distortion field and/or use engine ability. Your quick-charge shield can let you come out a strike with practically 0 hull dmg and 1 kill scored. If the use engine ability, you can use whatever u need to get on there tail and blast m to pieces.

 

While using concussion missile; dont get on their tail (500m or so), not helping. Stay at 3 or 4 km and you can barely miss. Specialise in shield damaging lasers (not saying ions, but the t5 option) and a t5 conc (armor pierce) does more dmg than a proton, killing almost all ships.

 

Im dont wanna write an entire article about it, but you can see strikers as scouts with a valuable sec weapon (although flashfires are concealed strikers and maybe somewhat better) and more armor/shields. Thats y they are good against gunships, they can take 1 or 2 hits while locking conc missile and firing lasers, and stationary gunships go down in 1 run.

[Kaivers]

Thought to contribute this post from another thread since the discussion is about buffing Strikefighters.

 

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaivers View Post

It's really not about thrust. A larger engine should = more engine power and regen at your disposal.

 

At the moment Scouts have access to an Engine Power Pool that is equal to or greater than Strikers. It is the same with Engine Regen. In addition they, rightly so, have higher Engine speed and consume less power from engines (afterburners). Take note of the following:

 

1. All Strikers have a base Engine Speed of 774m/s, while all Scouts have 780m/s....so Scouts are faster, not a problem makes sense.
    
   
2. All Strikers have a base Afterburner Cost of 5, while all Scouts have 4.....so Scouts have more efficient engines for thrust, not a problem makes sense.
    
   
3. All Strikers have a base Afterburner Consumption Rate of 10.4/s, while Scouts have 8.7/s...so again Scouts have more efficient engines, not a problem makes sense.
   

 

What doesn't make sense to me is that Scouts ALSO have both Engine Power Capacity (100-108) and Engine Regen (5.0 - 5.4) equal to or greater than Strikers.

 

So Scouts are not only faster and more maneuverable...they also have more power and regen available to sustain this speed for a longer period. Larger engine should = larger fuel tank.

 

Think about it in athletic terms. Scouts are supposed to be 100-200m Sprinters, where its all about acceleration and max speed right? While Strikers are 300-400m Sprinters where its all about endurance and sustained speed.

 

At present Scouts outperform in everything....Acceleration and Max Speed (Afterburner Cost/Consumption + Engine Speed), Endurance (Engine Regen) and Sustained Speed (Engine Power).

 

Its like Scouts are Usain Bolt AND Michael Johnson (in his prime) all rolled into one!

 

There's a reason Usain Bolt would burn Michael Johnson (in his prime) in any race up to 200m...and a reason Michael Johnson (in his prime) would come out on top in any race over 200m.

 

For Example:

 

100m

Usian Bolt's best: 9.58

Michael Johnson's best: 10.09

 

200m

Usain Bolt's best: 19.19

Michael Johnson's best: 19.32

 

300m

Michael Johnson's best: 30.85

Usain Bolt's best: 30.97

 

400m

Michael Johnson's best: 43.18 World Record

Usain Bolt's best: 45.28

 

I'm going to give the Devs the benefit of the doubt, because I really don't think they intended for Scouts to be a Michael Bolt or Usain Johnson. Lol.

 

Edit: To those who think this is a non issue, be advised that more engine power and faster regen increases a ship's "active" evasion capabilities. Stack this with passive evasion and you have a ship that, in the right hands, is near impossible to hit. Bottom line: Strikers should at the very least have more engine power than Scouts because it just makes sense. To further reduce imbalance I would also advise giving them faster Engine regen as well.

 

IMO: A Scout's ability to "Scout" is bolstered by its sensors so it uses its superior acceleration and speed to get ahead of the pack and reveal the battlefield to incoming Strike Fighters who use superior sustained speed and endurance to launch themselves in the direction of the enemy i.e. the "Striking" aspect of a Strike Fighter. Granted, a particular ship's build will give it the proper capabilities to perform as an effective combat fighter (the generic role of every ship in GSF is to be a combat fighter) but I believe this to be the specific role(s) of Scouts and Strikers.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Kaivers

[Arkerus]

Thought to contribute this post from another thread since the discussion is about buffing Strikefighters.

 

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaivers View Post

It's really not about thrust. A larger engine should = more engine power and regen at your disposal.

 

At the moment Scouts have access to an Engine Power Pool that is equal to or greater than Strikers. It is the same with Engine Regen. In addition they, rightly so, have higher Engine speed and consume less power from engines (afterburners). Take note of the following:

 

1. All Strikers have a base Engine Speed of 774m/s, while all Scouts have 780m/s....so Scouts are faster, not a problem makes sense.
    
   
2. All Strikers have a base Afterburner Cost of 5, while all Scouts have 4.....so Scouts have more efficient engines for thrust, not a problem makes sense.
    
   
3. All Strikers have a base Afterburner Consumption Rate of 10.4/s, while Scouts have 8.7/s...so again Scouts have more efficient engines, not a problem makes sense.
   

 

What doesn't make sense to me is that Scouts ALSO have both Engine Power Capacity (100-108) and Engine Regen (5.0 - 5.4) equal to or greater than Strikers.

 

So Scouts are not only faster and more maneuverable...they also have more power and regen available to sustain this speed for a longer period. Larger engine should = larger fuel tank.

 

Think about it in athletic terms. Scouts are supposed to be 100-200m Sprinters, where its all about acceleration and max speed right? While Strikers are 300-400m Sprinters where its all about endurance and sustained speed.

 

At present Scouts outperform in everything....Acceleration and Max Speed (Afterburner Cost/Consumption + Engine Speed), Endurance (Engine Regen) and Sustained Speed (Engine Power).

 

Its like Scouts are Usain Bolt AND Michael Johnson (in his prime) all rolled into one!

 

There's a reason Usain Bolt would burn Michael Johnson (in his prime) in any race up to 200m...and a reason Michael Johnson (in his prime) would come out on top in any race over 200m.

 

For Example:

 

100m

Usian Bolt's best: 9.58

Michael Johnson's best: 10.09

 

200m

Usain Bolt's best: 19.19

Michael Johnson's best: 19.32

 

300m

Michael Johnson's best: 30.85

Usain Bolt's best: 30.97

 

400m

Michael Johnson's best: 43.18 World Record

Usain Bolt's best: 45.28

 

I'm going to give the Devs the benefit of the doubt, because I really don't think they intended for Scouts to be a Michael Bolt or Usain Johnson. Lol.

 

Edit: To those who think this is a non issue, be advised that more engine power and faster regen increases a ship's "active" evasion capabilities. Stack this with passive evasion and you have a ship that, in the right hands, is near impossible to hit. Bottom line: Strikers should at the very least have more engine power than Scouts because it just makes sense. To further reduce imbalance I would also advise giving them faster Engine regen as well.

 

IMO: A Scout's ability to "Scout" is bolstered by its sensors so it uses its superior acceleration and speed to get ahead of the pack and reveal the battlefield to incoming Strike Fighters who use superior sustained speed and endurance to launch themselves in the direction of the enemy i.e. the "Striking" aspect of a Strike Fighter. Granted, a particular ship's build will give it the proper capabilities to perform as an effective combat fighter (the generic role of every ship in GSF is to be a combat fighter) but I believe this to be the specific role(s) of Scouts and Strikers.

 

This is exactly the problem with scouts. They simply have too much at their disposal. Side by side with strikers they are superior is almost every category. I think this topic is very much "fix the SF" but also the scout needs to be slightly changed so that they don't have the regen and access to that much energy and engine power.

 

Scouts should be scouts. Exactly as their name implies. But the way the game stands right at this moment, scouts are better in almost every category than the SF.

The new missiles in the next patch are a start to buffing SFs but since they are missiles we will still have the issue of scouts being able to catch and evade the SF in every aspect of the game.

 

When people say "striker aren't supposed to dog fight, they are supposed to stay away and launch missiles" that is just BS excuse to keep SFs from being buffed.

 

1. SF cannot avoid dog fights because scouts can outrun them and keep them in the fur all as long as they want.

2. The point of the game is to capture satellites, thus keeping everyone but gunships in dog fight mode. You have to try and take the satellite. That in and of itself is a huge portion of the game and is always a dog fight.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Arkerus

[Kaivers]

Not sure why some in the community think otherwise but a Strike Fighter's primary role is offense not defense.

 

Webster's Dictionary Definitions

 

Strike: intransitive verb

a : to engage in battle

b : to make a military attack

 

Fighter: noun one that fights: as

a : warrior, soldier

b : an airplane of high speed and maneuverability with armament designed to destroy enemy aircraft

 

So a Strike Fighter by definition is: an airplane of high speed and maneuverability that makes military attacks (offensive by nature) and engages in battle with an armament designed to destroy enemy aircraft.

 

Edit: Scouts can already reach and cap nodes faster than other craft and its actually easier for Scouts to dogfight around these nodes because they are the most maneuverable of all the fighters. Remember defending a node requires staying as close to it as possible. Strike Fighters by definition and role should be the primary Hunter Killers in a Squadron. Unfortunately this somehow got lost in translation.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Kaivers

[RebekahWSD]

Not sure why some in the community think otherwise but a Strike Fighter's primary role is offense not defense.

 

Webster's Dictionary Definitions

 

Strike: intransitive verb

a : to engage in battle

b : to make a military attack

 

Fighter: noun one that fights: as

a : warrior, soldier

b : an airplane of high speed and maneuverability with armament designed to destroy enemy aircraft

 

So a Strike Fighter by definition is: an airplane of high speed and maneuverability that makes military attacks (offensive by nature) and engages in battle with an armament designed to destroy enemy aircraft.

 

Edit: Scouts can already reach and cap nodes faster than other craft and its actually easier for Scouts to dogfight around these nodes because they are the most maneuverable of all the fighters. Remember defending a node requires staying as close to it as possible. Strike Fighters by definition and role should be the primary Hunter Killers in a Squadron. Unfortunately this somehow got lost in translation.

 

The way I see it, scouts are more like WWII fighters, the kind that inspired Star Wars to begin with. Designed for fast turning close fights, doing most of their damage with guns (primaries).

 

Compared to these, Strike Fighters feel and play much more like modern fighters. They engage at much longer range using missiles as their primary armament.

 

This is based on my experience switching off between my Flashfire and my Pike. The Flashfire feels like a P51 Mustang where the Pike feels like an F14 Tomcat (with Proton Torpedoes in place of Phoenix missiles). Totally different play styles but both equally effective when played to their strengths.

 

EDIT: Properly upgraded a Star Guard can get to the satellites almost as fast, and it's not about who gets there first but who caps it. I've contested sats with both scout and strike fighter long enough to keep it neutral till help arrives. Getting kills while circling the sat is hard in both ships. Orbiting is about denial while your teammates get the kills from above and below the line of the sat.

Edited January 25, 2014 by RebekahWSD