Evasion Is Fine

[Zoom_VI]

Do you know what passively negates 50% evasion?

 

Shooting twice.

 

Technically both shots could evade and on the other hand boths shots could hit.

 

Such is the nature of RNG mechanics. It may save your skin or it may be like "nah screw you" and let you die in two seconds.

[Kuciwalker]

Evasion is just taking the standard tracking penalty and making it worse.

 

If your target is dead center you will always hit your target.

 

This is absolutely false. I can attest to it with dozens of gunship duels in which I dodged shots which were clearly dead center via distortion field.

[Svarthrafn]

If your target is dead center you will always hit your target.

 

This has been my experience as well. But I use a strike running heavies with an accuracy companion these days. I also came over from a game where it pays to get on your target's tail first (so I do it here too). Distortion Field does seem to make an auto-miss however, and really needs to be looked at.

 

As for the maneuverability of scouts; If scouts want to circle jerk, I pull my speed back to minimum and roll back and forth as we circle until he gets bored of missing and decides to extend range. There's no way I will be hitting him in the circle jerk, so I make him be the one to put things back on my terms.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Svarthrafn

[LeonBraun]

I've said this a number of times now, and I'll say it again.

 

Don't try to out-scout the Scout.

 

The Scout's strength is firing upon stationary, or straight in line targets using their burst CDs. If you go head to head against one you will lose, don't even try that.

 

The way to counter a Scout is to use vector angle and fire missiles at them. Don't let them get a straight shot. In order for their burst guns and (low accuracy) Rocket Pods to work, they need you to be holding steady. Once they blow their CDs, they are paper thin for at least half a minute. Play to this weakness.

 

Don't play to a Scout's strength and then complain they are OP. They are nothing even close to OP, they have a defensive CD for a max of 6 seconds then are vulnerable. The players posting here calling them OP, are clearly countering them completely wrong.

Edited December 29, 2013 by LeonBraun

[Sharee]

I doubt that you're here to agree with anyone about the fact that Scout evasion is unbalanced, but for those of you that do not have your minds set on keeping your flavor, you have to consider what can be done in 6 seconds of invulnerability. No one is going to just wait for death after 6 seconds for starters, but also it's relatively simple to kill two players that naturally believe you to be an easy target. I most often use this ability to completely ignore danger and destroy one incoming target, but if timed well it is actually more than enough time to take out two people. Dead ships don't kill scouts.

 

Excuse me but what kind of player will face a scout - who he KNOWS most likely has distortion shield (not to mention distortion field has a very noticeable greenish glow!) - yet continues headlong into the scout's guns? Better yet, what kind of player will see his buddy being blown up in a straight head-on run, yet does the same thing and gets blown up as well?

 

A newbie.

 

So, if your point was that distortion field is overpowered because it allows one to kill two newbies in 6 seconds, i rest my case.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Sharee

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Except then why does my weebitty scout have the exact same hitbox as a gunship? Evasion is there to simulate the increased difficulty of hitting a small target.

 

If evasion was limited to only what a ship's base stats are I'd agree. But that doesn't explain why you can get passive evasion with components/companion buffs.

 

Plus if it's there to simulate hitbox size why is a gunship able to buff it's evasion to be comparable to what a star guard (tier 1 striker) can achieve? If it's there to correct hitbox wackiness it seems imbalanced then that ships have a roundabout way to "shrink" their hitboxes beyond what the devs have decided is required to correct the hitbox issues and I'm not sure it's balanced to be able to buff something that compensates for poor hitbox design. (my assumption here being that whatever a ship's base evasion stat is is what the devs decided was necessary to compensate for poor hitbox design meaning whatever addition buffs are applied are exceeding what the devs decided created balanced hitboxs).

 

At any rate I'm all for fixing hitbox size to be correct. That would then mean they could then completely remove evasion from the game since it would no longer be necessary to correct poor hitbox design and decreasing the whole RNG mechanics in GSF is good in my book.

 

Evasion is just taking the standard tracking penalty and making it worse.

 

If your target is dead center you will always hit your target.

 

Accepting for the moment that this is true then how is it that I can use distortion field to become completely invulnerable to turret fire shooting right at me during an attack run when using my flashfire? I have doubts that turrets have tracking penalties as I can't imagine it would be worth the hassle of trying to code such a thing if it is even possible.

 

From my own experience (and I gather others) distortion field boosts evasion to the point that scouts become invulnerable to all blaster fire and whether it's doing that by a straight accuracy reduction or tracking penalty multiplier invulnerability is no more balanced than being 1 shot. (if it's a tracking penalty multiplier then it's even worse since it means evasion is so powerful that even a single degree off center gets multiplied to the point of near 0 or 0% accuracy).

 

Overall though my experience is that it's a straight penalty to accuracy even when fired dead center of the firing arc. That's the only way I can think to explain how evasion is responsible for the immunity to blaster fire that myself and others have experienced even in situations where tracking penalties should be minimal or non-existent.

 

The Scout's strength is firing upon stationary, or straight in line targets using their burst CDs. If you go head to head against one you will lose, don't even try that.

 

It seems from my experience flying strikers the only way scouts survive head to head is by popping distortion field that gives them complete invulnerability to blaster fire. When I've fought scouts that had distortion field on CD in a head to head confrontation they almost always die unless I screw up/their wingman arrives.

 

They're supposed to rely on their mobility to stay alive and use that to ambush enemies. They're supposed to have defenses too weak to survive straight in line attacks or go head to head where the enemy can return fire (especially against enemies that have stronger defenses - it kinda defeats the purpose of having stronger defense if the ship with the weakest defense can regularly beat them playing chicken). The only reason that tactic currently works and isn't automatic death is the way evasion + distortion field currently work to grant them survivability they shouldn't have.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Brilo]

I've said this a number of times now, and I'll say it again.

 

Don't try to out-scout the Scout.

 

I believe we can all agree that you disagree with one of the primary design concepts behind the Scout as incepted by the devs. Thankfully that has never been in question.

 

Sharee, I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not really worried about it either.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Brilo

[Helig]

Evasion is just taking the standard tracking penalty and making it worse.

 

If your target is dead center you will always hit your target.

Not exactly *ALWAYS*. But the hit percentage is pretty darn close to 100%. Tested on countless dumb Scouts who thought they were a hard target sitting between the folds of a satellite.

[Sharee]

Sharee, I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not really worried about it either.

 

Well. You insinuated that scout evasion is unbalanced because it is possible to take out two enemies in 6 seconds while being immune to their laser fire. I'm just pointing out the scenario has more to do with the inexperience of those two enemies than with evasion being unbalanced.

[Brilo]

Okay, so here are the arguments presented here that Evasion with Distortion Field is unbalanced from this board:

Please note, I have omitted specific arguments that only dealt with Evasion and not specifically with Distortion Field.

 

1) Creates a 100% miss rate on both missiles and lasers for 3 seconds or 100% miss rate on lasers for 6 seconds, mitigation unachievable with any other ability, and unachievable by the Strike Fighter class. Can be used once every 20 seconds.

2) The natural dogfighting counter to the Scout as stated in various text in-game, the Strike Fighter, can only buff accuracy to a maximum of +6%, which equates to 0% accuracy versus an active Distortion Field.

3) Applying Distortion Field allows a FlashFire(and equivalent) to destroy any configuration of Strike Fighter head-on with impunity once every 20 seconds. The invulnerability lasts longer than it takes a Scout to destroy any ship in the game without cooldowns.

4) Evasion has no indicator when evasions occur, creating confusion for players (particularly players new to GSF) when they can completely unload their weapon capacity to no affect. Result on casual observation presents similarly to loss of connectivity, occasionally leading players to believe the encounter was a glitch or a hack.

5) Shooting at a target perfectly in your sights should count for something. With Distortion Field active, it doesn't matter.

6) Superior maneuverability of the Scout allows them to fly evasively in relative safety for the remainder of the duration of the 20 second cooldown on distortion field, after which they gain another period of invulnerability to safely attack another target.

7) The physical maneuverability of the Scout is how Scouts are supposed to mitigate damage, not via an invulnerability cooldown mechanic.

8) Distortion Field allows a Scout to sit completely still in space and still be invulnerable to damage, which seems more like an invulnerability shield than any kind of evasion.

9) Distortion Field's passive represents the largest passive boost available in the game.

 

Arguments that Evasion with Distortion Field is balanced:

1) Invulnerability only lasts for 6 seconds, then you die in two hits.

2) Don't try to out-scout the scout. Scouts are supposed to be able to take Strike Fighters head-on.

3) Missiles negate Distortion Field.

4) Similar to Force Barrier in ground PvP, players would be ignorant to attempt to shoot down a ship with Distortion Field active.

 

Please let me know if I missed anything or if I did not fairly paraphrase one of the arguments. I am not attempting to refute any arguments, this is meant to see if the arguments stand on their own.

 

Thank you.

 

Edit: Removed Perfect-Center shot argument per author's request.

Edit: Added argument against DF balance - Passive Boost

Edited January 1, 2014 by Brilo
Removed perfect-center shot argument per author's request

[Svarthrafn]

@Brilo

 

Dead center hits are not an argument in favor of DField. If you have a target dead center, you will hit the vast majority of time regardless of passive evasion. Distortion Field though tends to send thing back to being auto-miss.

 

Even in my OP I believe I stated DField is jacked. Evasion fine. DField ludicrous.

[Brilo]

On a personal note, I find each of the arguments in favor of Distortion Field being balanced to be implausible and too reliant on the "Learn to Play" device without reasonable detail. One argument that no one seems to have attempted to refute is the idea that Distortion Field is comparable to the presumably balanced Force Barrier Ability.

 

Force Barrier is an invulnerability field that is channeled, therefore it does not allow the Sage to kill anyone with impunity during its' duration. Furthermore, ground PvP presents with zero capability of one- or two-shotting another player, so the comparison is ill-matched to the much faster-paced GSF module.

Lastly, Force Barrier is on a 180 second cooldown, which is one of the primary elements used to balance that ability;

Distortion Field is on a 20 second cooldown and lasts for 30% of the duration of the cooldown while Force Barrier lasts for less than 6% of the duration of the cooldown.

 

If anything, Force Barrier appears to a good argument against Distortion Field balance, not in favor.

[Kuciwalker]

Brilo's summary is excellent but misses on additional thing: even when not in use, the distortion field provides 15% passive evasion, making it the best passive and active shield ability.

[Lymain]

On a personal note, I find each of the arguments in favor of Distortion Field being balanced to be implausible and too reliant on the "Learn to Play" device without reasonable detail. One argument that no one seems to have attempted to refute is the idea that Distortion Field is comparable to the presumably balanced Force Barrier Ability.

 

Force Barrier is an invulnerability field that is channeled, therefore it does not allow the Sage to kill anyone with impunity during its' duration. Furthermore, ground PvP presents with zero capability of one- or two-shotting another player, so the comparison is ill-matched to the much faster-paced GSF module.

Lastly, Force Barrier is on a 180 second cooldown, which is one of the primary elements used to balance that ability;

Distortion Field is on a 20 second cooldown and lasts for 30% of the duration of the cooldown while Force Barrier lasts for less than 6% of the duration of the cooldown.

 

If anything, Force Barrier appears to a good argument against Distortion Field balance, not in favor.

 

I think the Force Barrier analogy was just pointing out how experienced players can recognize when their target is invulnerable and act accordingly, rather than wailing away on the target like an idiot.

[Brilo]

I think the Force Barrier analogy was just pointing out how experienced players can recognize when their target is invulnerable and act accordingly, rather than wailing away on the target like an idiot.

 

In that case, it may actually be a worse argument. Force Barrier is highly visible even in the midst of fire and explosions, while you might not even notice the effect on DF in the middle of a firefight until after you've recognized that you've missed too many times, which can just as easily be when you're gone. This is most common at the time when Strike Fighters should be at their best, head-on when the Scout with DF just points directly at the Strike.

 

The alternative as a Strike is to assume that every Scout that flies directly at you has popped DF and to give up the only advantage you have over them, the straight-on engagement, then do your best to make it happen again within the next 20 seconds.

[Zoom_VI]

I am fairly certian that gunships running Dfield and lightweight armor are more BS than scouts with it, b/c at least Dfield scouts only have Dfield for defense where gunships have Dfield plus heaviest hull and shields.

[renegadeimp]

I am fairly certian that gunships running Dfield and lightweight armor are more BS than scouts with it, b/c at least Dfield scouts only have Dfield for defense where gunships have Dfield plus heaviest hull and shields.

 

And yet they are still very easy kills if you dont tunnel vision them. On a gunship, you have to watch them. Wait for them to blow their defensive cooldowns and then take the shot.

 

Too many people complain about gunships using cooldowns. Isnt that the entire point of using them?

[Zoom_VI]

Too many people complain about gunships using cooldowns. Isnt that the entire point of using them?

 

You can make the exact same arguement for scouts using Dfield too.

[renegadeimp]

You can make the exact same arguement for scouts using Dfield too.

 

Because theres nothing wrong with it. Its only the players that are tunnel visioning their target or who want a 1v1 that complain.

 

Look at the experienced players, they pick and choose their fights and know how to counter specific scenarios. You dont see them complaining about Dfield, GS's, barrel roll etc. They want a challenge and normally come out on top.

 

The poor skilled players want it to be like ground pvp where FOTM classes > all and it doesnt take any real skill.

 

what needs to happen is players need to quit complaining and stop making excuses because they lost a fight in a video game, sit back, relax, and try out different methods over the course of a few battles. Thats how experienced players do it and thats how they beat everyone. If you are totally unwilling to put the effort in to be good, and instead come here to complain because you havent worked out how to counter something, then you should stick to the ground game, or get a premade together.

 

It really is as simple as that.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

@Brilo

 

Dead center hits are not an argument in favor of DField. If you have a target dead center, you will hit the vast majority of time regardless of passive evasion. Distortion Field though tends to send thing back to being auto-miss.

 

Even in my OP I believe I stated DField is jacked. Evasion fine. DField ludicrous.

 

I agree that dead center hits don't argue in favor of DField, I think it becomes significant though in discussions of how the evasion mechanic works (straight penalty to accuracy or a multiplier of tracking penalties). Examining how the math works out using both schools of thought and then comparing it to the observed results of using DField can strongly indicate how evasion actually works.

 

But I think in the context of debating DField as Brilo has outlined it is far more important that we agree that dead center hits are not an argument in favor of DField.

 

I think the Force Barrier analogy was just pointing out how experienced players can recognize when their target is invulnerable and act accordingly, rather than wailing away on the target like an idiot.

 

This assumes combat in both cases is the same, which they distinctly aren't. Dogfighting is inherently different from the ground combat.

 

Force Barrier may grant invulnerability but, if I understand how channeling works, you can't kite during the channel or else it cancels the channel (at least when I've played my Commando and Shadow DPS moving interrupts channeled abilities). So an enemy can be in relatively good position to resume attacking immediately after the ability ends.

 

By comparison DField allows a scout to kite and avoid being in a situation where the enemy can immediately resume damaging them once the ability ends. Generally speaking in a dogfight you might only get a window of a few seconds in which to attack your enemy and once that window closes you must resume the battle of trying to maneuver into a position where you can fire on them again (depending on range, relative skill of the pilots, and cover, this can take quite a few seconds). It can artificially prolong a dogfight well beyond how long it should have taken (while all shield active abilities can be useful in a battle of attrition they can only increase the amount of damage a shield takes before breaking whereas DField grants invulnerability; taking no damage is inherently better in a war of attrition).

 

Because theres nothing wrong with it. Its only the players that are tunnel visioning their target or who want a 1v1 that complain.

 

Look at the experienced players, they pick and choose their fights and know how to counter specific scenarios. You dont see them complaining about Dfield, GS's, barrel roll etc. They want a challenge and normally come out on top.

 

I consider myself reasonably skilled, maybe not the best but I'm usually towards the top of my team's scoreboard. And I take issue with DField allowing scouts to play chicken with my striker when the in game description of the Flashfire states that they "may not compete head-on against a striker" yet DField allows them to arguably be better than a striker when playing chicken (presumably a skilled scout pilot wouldn't play chicken with a striker when DField is on CD). If playing chicken is supposed to be an advantage my striker has over a scout how is it balanced that scout's have an ability that actually encourages them to play chicken because they actually have the advantage in that scenario. (And to be fair I think for any ship class invulnerability is just as bad as being able to 1 shot an enemy).

 

I'd wager most of the people taking issue with DField, GS 1 shotting people, Ion Railgun love tap abuse etc. are rather skilled pilots not L2P newbs.

 

The poor skilled players want it to be like ground pvp where FOTM classes > all and it doesnt take any real skill.

 

Considering that generally the people who are complaining about DField (or the other things you listed are the ones on the receiving end it's illogical to suggest that they want the FotM ships to be better than everything as the FotM ships are the ones utilizing the very things being complained about. So your statement actually more accurately describes the DField defenders as they're presumably flying the ships that benefit from it, are also using those builds and thus want their FotM ship to remain the FotM.

Edited January 1, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[DEATHICIDE]

I've said this a number of times now, and I'll say it again.

 

Don't try to out-scout the Scout.

 

The Scout's strength is firing upon stationary, or straight in line targets using their burst CDs. If you go head to head against one you will lose, don't even try that.

 

The way to counter a Scout is to use vector angle and fire missiles at them. Don't let them get a straight shot. In order for their burst guns and (low accuracy) Rocket Pods to work, they need you to be holding steady. Once they blow their CDs, they are paper thin for at least half a minute. Play to this weakness.

 

Don't play to a Scout's strength and then complain they are OP. They are nothing even close to OP, they have a defensive CD for a max of 6 seconds then are vulnerable. The players posting here calling them OP, are clearly countering them completely wrong.

 

I'm sorry, but I thought that was the Strikefighter's role????

 

Scouts are for scouting, and high maneuverability dogfighting, aren't they?

 

Scouts = tie fighter, strike fighter = x-wing right?

 

So who do you think should win in a head on stationary firefight?

 

The scout?

Okay, if you say so...

[Lymain]

Considering that generally the people who are complaining about DField (or the other things you listed are the ones on the receiving end it's illogical to suggest that they want the FotM ships to be better than everything as the FotM ships are the ones utilizing the very things being complained about. So your statement actually more accurately describes the DField defenders as they're presumably flying the ships that benefit from it, are also using those builds and thus want their FotM ship to remain the FotM.

 

I actually prefer Quick-Charge Shield because it allows me to be liberal with my afterburners without having to keep power to engines. I defend Distortion Field because I really like the ship customization element of GSF, and I would hate to see Distortion Field reduced to a non-option.

 

I also know that Brilo is not a bad player and that he flies a Flashfire with Distortion Field sometimes. I guess he would like to see Distortion Field nerfed because he doesn't like scouts being good at jousting (for whatever reason). Personally, I don't like jousting on scouts either, which is part of the reason I prefer the Quick-Charge Shield. /shrug

 

My point is just that reasonable people can have different opinions on this without totally selfish motivations. The ad hominems add nothing to the discussion.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Lymain

[Brilo]

I actually prefer Quick-Charge Shield because it allows me to be liberal with my afterburners without having to keep power to engines. I defend Distortion Field because I really like the ship customization element of GSF, and I would hate to see Distortion Field reduced to a non-option.

 

I also know that Brilo is not a bad player and that he flies a Flashfire with Distortion Field sometimes. I guess he would like to see Distortion Field nerfed because he doesn't like scouts being good at jousting (for whatever reason). Personally, I don't like jousting on scouts either, which is part of the reason I prefer the Quick-Charge Shield. /shrug

 

My point is just that reasonable people can have different opinions on this without totally selfish motivations. The ad hominems add nothing to the discussion.

 

It's always fun to see that people notice us on the other side. Xeric and I have indeed had a number of run-ins, I would go so far as to say he is an exceedingly competent pilot who also often runs matches in the advanced scout, one of perhaps a dozen pilots I privately groan about when I see them listed on the other side (you know who you are, and damn you)

 

I would like to think that our reasons for wanting changes pale in the face of any facts that our player community can agree upon. I dislike both the jousting and the dead-stop combat that scouts have begun using as a result of DF's affects whether I am using it or I see it used, it's counter-intuitive, bland, and breaks immersion. I believe that tuning this one ability would have a noticeably positive impact on the game's balance as a whole. I also believe that my personal dislike of one ability is not a good reason to change a game to any degree.

 

Let us hope that reason will prevail, whether it turns out to be balanced or not Of course we can hope that fallacies and anecdotal evidence would take a back seat in discussions about game balance, but inevitably they will be used and discussed as fact.

 

I found that the list of arguments helped me recognize the difference in some of the more subtle cases and the strength of the cases for and against, mostly due to the preponderance or lack of detail or statistics. Hopefully others will find it useful as well.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Brilo

[reclipsed]

I'm sorry, but I thought that was the Strikefighter's role????

 

Scouts are for scouting, and high maneuverability dogfighting, aren't they?

 

Scouts = tie fighter, strike fighter = x-wing right?

 

So who do you think should win in a head on stationary firefight?

 

The scout?

Okay, if you say so...

 

iirc. TIEs killed x-wings fairly quickly with a few shots in the movies, but I think their drawback was zero or very minimal shields. They were literally flying blasters with a saddle.

Edited January 2, 2014 by reclipsed

[Zoom_VI]

iirc. TIEs killed x-wings fairly quickly with a few shots in the movies, but I think their drawback was zero or very minimal shields. They were literally flying blasters with a saddle.

 

TIE don't have any shields at all, or hyperdrives, or armor. They are all engine and guns which is coincidentally very similar to a gsf scout.....