I am SICK AND TIRED of missing 41% of my shots because of Evasion

[Nemarus]

This is supposed to be primarily a skill based game, right?

 

So why does at least half of every ship in every match have 41% Evasion ... PASSIVELY, ALL THE TIME? That means I miss 4 out of 10 of my shots!

 

Even with the most accurate weapons in the game, I can get to reliably hit maybe 7 out of 10... maybe 8 with an active ability.

 

And it's not like these are tank builds who sacrifice offensive capability for defensive survivability. Taking Distortion Field and the right Defensive Crew member has ZERO effect on your offensive capability. There's no tradeoff.

The only decision you have to make is, "Do I want slightly more shields that I can angle, the same shields that recharge fast, or do I just want to not be hit by 4 out of every 10 shots ALL the time?" And that's not even taking into consideration Distortion Field's active ability, which makes it so you can not be hit by ALL shots for 6 seconds.

 

I've played this game since closed beta in October. I am VERY good--I fly every ship on both sides, and I try out multiple component configurations.

 

I want to try and be the guy who doesn't just cave and exclusively play what is obviously the most effective ships/components. I wanted to try and make a Sting with Directional Shields and Quad cannons and Range capacitors work (after all--they are options, so they should be viable, right?). And I can make it work with skillful play and effort.

 

The problem is when I switch to my pub pilot and use my Flashfire with Burst Laser Cannons and Distortion Field, I am a god amongst insects (unless they, too, are aces flying the same ship). The ONLY other ship that can touch me is another Sting/Flashfire running the same build, or a Gunship spamming Ion lovetaps.

So devs... is PASSIVE EVASION really supposed to be this strong?

 

Sure, there's a chance mines might be an effective counter to these builds ... but really, in a game about Star Wars starfighter combat, where the vast majority of combat is done by lasers and blasters -- should any build just AVOID 41% of all laser shots and require specialized weapons like mines and drones to counter?

Edited January 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[dancezwithnubz]

without that evasion, gunships would circle-stomp all over scouts.

[Nemarus]

without that evasion, gunships would circle-stomp all over scouts.

 

I fly a Scout with only 26% Evasion, and no Gunships stomp me. Not to mention Strikes who can't get more than 21% Evasion. They somehow manage to survive and be functional despite Gunships.

 

And even if that claim of yours were true (which it isn't), then fine... make Scouts have a stat that helps them evade shots fired from long range. Perhaps 5% Evasion for every 1000m beyond 4000m. That'd give them 55% Evasion against a Gunship shooting from 15k out. Or 30% Evasion against a shot coming from 10k out.

 

That'd be far more fair than a build that dodges 41% of the fundamental, basic attack used by every ship in the game.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[Suzina]

This is supposed to be primarily a skill based game, right?

 

The only decision you have to make is, "Do I want slightly more shields that I can angle, the same shields that recharge fast, or do I just want to not be hit by 4 out of every 10 shots ALL the time?" And that's not even taking into consideration Distortion Field's active ability, which makes it so you can not be hit by ALL shots for 6 seconds.

I have a pretty fantastic maxed out Blackbolt with Sensor probe, shields and armor. No evasion whatsoever except a slight buff on one of my chrew members. I actually have tried both evasion and shield based builds, since the ship is max'd, and I keep it on Shields.

 

I have no engine or booster buffs, but boost to unguarded or solo-guarded objectives and capture with my scout. My playstyle often has me needing every little bit of everything all in the span of a few seconds. Shields give me more control than an evasion based build. I might come straight at a guy, jamming off my rocket pods as I fire knowing he's firing back with his fortress shield thinking he's safe (it's a better ability right?). Yet if I fly in with power to shields, (while firing blasters/rockets) and don't pop my shield cooldown until he's torn through my shields once, at which point I also pop hull-repair to begin the HOT ticking, I'll out-sheild fortress shield and out-hull a gunship in a straight point-blank shoot-out. I even switch to weapon-power once shields are down for the finishing touch of weapon boost. It's often over before I run out of blaster power.

 

I also love doing a humming-bird attack around a sat' and popping turrets with power to shields. If I use shield-boost during shooting the 2nd turret, I don't have to slow down and can kill all 3 turrets in one clean swoop consistently. I'm not sure how this attack maneuver is with an evasion build, but it seems highly effective with a Shield build.

 

 

... I have never been a "god among insects" in a starfighter match, and if I know Starcraft there are often ways to maximize builds effectiveness, but at least at my level of skill, the shield build is at least viable.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Suzina

[mr_sim]

I think your answer does lie on the side of bomber release.

 

If Scouts are victims to bombers then I propose we stick to my distortion field double blind nerf. Since Bombers would be the counter to scouts that we hope they will be. Remember the distortion nerf only nerfs DF offensively but leaves it intact defensively.

 

However if Bombers are merely yet another victim for the scouts then the whole scout class needs to be sent to the shop for these kinds of major adjustments.

 

PTS is grossly underpopulated this round and buggy to boot. Only 2.6 will tell unfortunately.

[Armonddd]

It's important for developers and designers to realize that there is a difference between chance and luck when it comes to games. Both are important for adding surprise, and thus fun, to the game.

 

The short version is, luck is when the game decides whether something will happen, for example when the computer determines whether an attack hits, misses, or crits. Chance is when various strategies decide whether something will happen, for example "what's the chance I can sneak up on this gunship without him noticing me?"

 

The critical difference between the two is player response. Players can't do anything about luck, and while good luck can be exciting, bad luck quickly becomes frustrating. Chance, however, is something the player can respond to; if one tactic reveals itself to have a low chance of success, the player can adapt his tactics to something more effective.

 

It's also critical to understand that while chance favors the experienced player (because increased skills make for a higher chance things will go your way), luck favors the novice player (who must more often rely on luck for success than he does his own tactics and skills).

 

If this is to be a game based on skill, there need to be major adjustments in the presence of luck and chance (among other things). If this is not to be a game based on skill, playing it will become an exercise in frustration.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Armonddd

[Verain]

without that evasion, gunships would circle-stomp all over scouts.

 

No, without that evasion scouts would have 57% stronger shields and a choice of armor such as extra health or damage reduction. That would make for much more survivability if the evasion wasn't so mathematically superior. The other shields really need a buff, or disto field needs a nerf.

[Arkerus]

This is supposed to be primarily a skill based game, right?

 

So why does at least half of every ship in every match have 41% Evasion ... PASSIVELY, ALL THE TIME? That means I miss 4 out of 10 of my shots!

 

Even with the most accurate weapons in the game, I can get to reliably hit maybe 7 out of 10... maybe 8 with an active ability.

 

And it's not like these are tank builds who sacrifice offensive capability for defensive survivability. Taking Distortion Field and the right Defensive Crew member has ZERO effect on your offensive capability. There's no tradeoff.

The only decision you have to make is, "Do I want slightly more shields that I can angle, the same shields that recharge fast, or do I just want to not be hit by 4 out of every 10 shots ALL the time?" And that's not even taking into consideration Distortion Field's active ability, which makes it so you can not be hit by ALL shots for 6 seconds.

 

I've played this game since closed beta in October. I am VERY good--I fly every ship on both sides, and I try out multiple component configurations.

 

I want to try and be the guy who doesn't just cave and exclusively play what is obviously the most effective ships/components. I wanted to try and make a Sting with Directional Shields and Quad cannons and Range capacitors work (after all--they are options, so they should be viable, right?). And I can make it work with skillful play and effort.

 

The problem is when I switch to my pub pilot and use my Flashfire with Burst Laser Cannons and Distortion Field, I am a god amongst insects (unless they, too, are aces flying the same ship). The ONLY other ship that can touch me is another Sting/Flashfire running the same build, or a Gunship spamming Ion lovetaps.

So devs... is PASSIVE EVASION really supposed to be this strong?

 

Sure, there's a chance mines might be an effective counter to these builds ... but really, in a game about Star Wars starfighter combat, where the vast majority of combat is done by lasers and blasters -- should any build just AVOID 41% of all laser shots and require specialized weapons like mines and drones to counter?

 

While I love GSF what you described is the central problem in the game.

 

Evasion is a stat that you simply cannot mitigate beyond some simple buffs. Throw in distortion field and your well aimed shots become totally wasted.

 

Scouts already have the best maneuverability in the game. They also have the best evasion. Then throw on distortion field. It's the primary reason strikers aren't used very much.

 

IF the game didn't have an evasion stat and all shots counted (or just had some static chance to miss) then scouts would be much better balanced.

 

The base evasion rate in the entire game should be dropped across the board to reward skillful shots. The scout is a superior fighter in every way because of exactly what you describe.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Arkerus

[mr_sim]

The short version is, luck is when the game decides whether something will happen, for example a lucky streak of crits or misses.

 

Well that's a totally ignorant statement about how a computerized sudo random number generator works. Fact is that they are streaky.

[Armonddd]

Well that's a totally ignorant statement about how a computerized sudo random number generator works. Fact is that they are streaky.

 

I was attempting to describe, in simple terms, the difference between randomness that the player(s) can control and randomness that the player(s) cannot, i.e. is controlled by the game (be it by a die roll, a PRNG, a coin flip, etc). It actually had no direct relation to the PRNG(s) this game uses. But I suppose that's not evident if you don't read the whole thing, so I've reworded that section.

 

Though by all means, if you think you can educate the computer science student about PRNGs, feel free to do so.

 

(also, brotip, it's pseudo. sudo is what you use when talking to linux.)

Edited January 24, 2014 by Armonddd

[Gavin_Kelvar]

While I love GSF what you described is the central problem in the game.

 

Evasion is a stat that you simply cannot mitigate beyond some simple buffs. Throw in distortion field and your well aimed shots become totally wasted.

 

Scouts already have the best maneuverability in the game. They also have the best evasion. Then throw on distortion field. It's the primary reason strikers aren't used very much.

 

IF the game didn't have an evasion stat and all shots counted (or just had some static chance to miss) then scouts would be much better balanced.

 

The base evasion rate in the entire game should be dropped across the board to reward skillful shots. The scout is a superior fighter in every way because of exactly what you describe.

 

Fully agreed.

 

Aside from the aggravating issue of missing shots due to RNG you can't control it also has the problem of being way off balance with armor. For one the Pike/Quell can only stack armor up to 34% passively. Now evasion and armor both have the function of mitigating damage but evasion is vastly superior for several reasons:

 

1) it can not be 100% countered with a passive weapon trait, armor can be countered by any weapon with 100% armor penetration

 

2) armor only mitigates damage done to your hull, evasion mitigates damage done to both your shield and hull

 

3) armor only mitigates a portion of damage already taken, evasion avoids damage entirely. Avoiding damage entirely will always be inherently preferable to minimizing a portion of it.

 

Considering all of this the highest amount of evasion you can stack needs to be brought down significantly so armor has comparable value. (While armor could be buffed significantly I don't think it's to anyone's benefit as the incoming bombers already have the ability to stack armor to 39% so a buff would probably give them well over 50% armor. Making non-armor penetrating weapons all but useless against them isn't likely to result in balance). Also factor in that not all ships have access to armor so buffing armor will just decrease the appeal of flying them since they won't reap any benefit from a buff intended to counter balance the power of evasion.

[DEATHICIDE]

This is supposed to be primarily a skill based game, right?

 

So why does at least half of every ship in every match have 41% Evasion ... PASSIVELY, ALL THE TIME? That means I miss 4 out of 10 of my shots!

 

Even with the most accurate weapons in the game, I can get to reliably hit maybe 7 out of 10... maybe 8 with an active ability.

 

And it's not like these are tank builds who sacrifice offensive capability for defensive survivability. Taking Distortion Field and the right Defensive Crew member has ZERO effect on your offensive capability. There's no tradeoff.

The only decision you have to make is, "Do I want slightly more shields that I can angle, the same shields that recharge fast, or do I just want to not be hit by 4 out of every 10 shots ALL the time?" And that's not even taking into consideration Distortion Field's active ability, which makes it so you can not be hit by ALL shots for 6 seconds.

 

I've played this game since closed beta in October. I am VERY good--I fly every ship on both sides, and I try out multiple component configurations.

 

I want to try and be the guy who doesn't just cave and exclusively play what is obviously the most effective ships/components. I wanted to try and make a Sting with Directional Shields and Quad cannons and Range capacitors work (after all--they are options, so they should be viable, right?). And I can make it work with skillful play and effort.

 

The problem is when I switch to my pub pilot and use my Flashfire with Burst Laser Cannons and Distortion Field, I am a god amongst insects (unless they, too, are aces flying the same ship). The ONLY other ship that can touch me is another Sting/Flashfire running the same build, or a Gunship spamming Ion lovetaps.

So devs... is PASSIVE EVASION really supposed to be this strong?

 

Sure, there's a chance mines might be an effective counter to these builds ... but really, in a game about Star Wars starfighter combat, where the vast majority of combat is done by lasers and blasters -- should any build just AVOID 41% of all laser shots and require specialized weapons like mines and drones to counter?

 

Devs:

No comments from you after the previous threads about this, so please listen to this one.

Op is right on the money with his first, and 2nd post.

Please clean up the goofiness, even just a little would go a long way.

Nemarus has your solution for those who cry about Gunships, It's all right here.

[DarthVindictus]

without that evasion, gunships would circle-stomp all over scouts.

 

No, all it means is that without that evasion you can't barrel roll straight at a gunship that is already targeting you and charging a shot and not get hit and unload at the end of your barrel roll. You'll actually have to go around. As it is Scouts completely dominate every other type of ship in the game because of their mobility to make them harder to actually hit, combined with their passive evade it makes their "weakness" of low shields and hull health nothing. The only time your weak hull even comes into play is a fully charged slug railshot with bypass active, and that's if the shot doesn't miss because of passive evade.

[Sharee]

Scout effective HP isn't much different from the effective HP of a strike fighter, even counting in *only* the evasion.

 

950 hull @ 41% evasion is 1610 HP

1450 hull @ 11% evasion is 1629 HP

 

If you count in damage reduction it's up to 1715 HP for the strike fighter.

 

And that doesn't count in the shields which are much stronger on the strike fighter, both shield strength and shield regen. Strongest shield you can get on a flashfire(if you want to keep the 41% evasion) is 1300. Strongest shield you can get on a starguard is 2340 (80% stronger than the scout, along with ~40% faster recharge).

 

The only saving grace for the scout is the increased maneuverability. I'd say the craft are pretty well balanced *with* the scout passive evasion.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Sharee

[Armonddd]

The only saving grace for the scout is the increased maneuverability. I'd say the craft are pretty well balanced *with* the scout passive evasion.

 

The math actually doesn't matter much here. RNG defense doesn't translate quite as easily into real gameplay as your math would make it seem - I'd much rather that 41% roll land on a fully charged slug shot with bypass than a rapid-fire laser strike. Furthermore, it's simply not fun to play against. Increased maneuverability means very few opportunities to hit the scout (it is challenging and fun to line up those shots, but strikes in particular are always behind on the maneuverability front and be at a distinct disadvantage). Evasion means a lot of those hits miss because of something out of your control. Being unable to hit the target because of a layer of defense you have zero control over is frustrating, and if you're in a strike, having no response to the scout's mobility just further compounds the problem.

[Sharee]

The math actually doesn't matter much here. RNG defense doesn't translate quite as easily into real gameplay as your math would make it seem - I'd much rather that 41% roll land on a fully charged slug shot with bypass than a rapid-fire laser strike. Furthermore, it's simply not fun to play against. Increased maneuverability means very few opportunities to hit the scout (it is challenging and fun to line up those shots, but strikes in particular are always behind on the maneuverability front and be at a distinct disadvantage). Evasion means a lot of those hits miss because of something out of your control. Being unable to hit the target because of a layer of defense you have zero control over is frustrating, and if you're in a strike, having no response to the scout's mobility just further compounds the problem.

 

Yes, there is a layer of defense you have zero control over. But that layer of defense replaces a different layer of defense. Where the scout's evasion makes you miss 4 times, the strike fighter's extra EHP forces you to fire 4 more hits to kill it.

 

Even if it takes 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a strike fighter and the same 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a scout, people will be frustrated when fighting the scout because they see 4 of those 10 shots miss, while all 10 shots fired against the strike will hit.

 

This is not a game balance issue. Just a perception issue.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Sharee

[tunewalker]

Yes, there is a layer of defense you have zero control over. But that layer of defense replaces a different layer of defense. Where the scout's evasion makes you miss 4 times, the strike fighter's extra EHP forces you to fire 4 more hits to kill it.

 

Even if it takes 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a strike fighter and the same 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a scout, people will be frustrated when fighting the scout because they see 4 of those 10 shots miss, while all 10 shots fired against the strike will hit.

 

This is not a game balance issue. Just a perception issue.

 

I think the issue is it takes the same number of shots to kill both ships and one of them is more maneuverable and has greater burst potential. Thus leaving little reason to fly the slower ship. The benefit to flying a slower ship is supposed to be it is tougher. If that isn't the case then the faster moving, faster killing ship is either to tough or the slower moving slower killing ship isnt tough enough.

[Armonddd]

Yes, there is a layer of defense you have zero control over. But that layer of defense replaces a different layer of defense. Where the scout's evasion makes you miss 4 times, the strike fighter's extra EHP forces you to fire 4 more hits to kill it.

 

Even if it takes 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a strike fighter and the same 10 accurately aimed shots to kill a scout, people will be frustrated when fighting the scout because they see 4 of those 10 shots miss, while all 10 shots fired against the strike will hit.

 

This is not a game balance issue. Just a perception issue.

 

Stop using averages. They don't actually mean anything compared to real experiences, especially when it doesn't take ten shots to kill a target.

 

When it takes me two shots to kill their best scout and I miss five of them in a row because RNG, fun is not had.

[Sharee]

I think the issue is it takes the same number of shots to kill both ships and one of them is more maneuverable and has greater burst potential. Thus leaving little reason to fly the slower ship. The benefit to flying a slower ship is supposed to be it is tougher. If that isn't the case then the faster moving, faster killing ship is either to tough or the slower moving slower killing ship isnt tough enough.

 

That '10 shots' was just a simplified example to explain what i meant by 'perception problem'. Check the real math a few posts higher. The strike fighter, when accounting for everything (hull, evasion, DR, shields) has ~40% higher effective hitpoints than the scout. That figure already includes the scout's 41% evasion. That means it takes more accurately aimed shots to kill a strike than a scout, not the same number.

 

To counteract this, the scout has higher maneuverability, thus making accurate shots harder.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Sharee

[Sharee]

Stop using averages. They don't actually mean anything compared to real experiences.

 

Yes, let's balance the game based on anecdotal evidence sprinkled with personal perception instead

Edited January 24, 2014 by Sharee

[Zoom_VI]

The math actually doesn't matter much here. RNG defense doesn't translate quite as easily into real gameplay as your math would make it seem - I'd much rather that 41% roll land on a fully charged slug shot with bypass than a rapid-fire laser strike. Furthermore, it's simply not fun to play against. Increased maneuverability means very few opportunities to hit the scout (it is challenging and fun to line up those shots, but strikes in particular are always behind on the maneuverability front and be at a distinct disadvantage). Evasion means a lot of those hits miss because of something out of your control. Being unable to hit the target because of a layer of defense you have zero control over is frustrating, and if you're in a strike, having no response to the scout's mobility just further compounds the problem.

 

But also remember that the RNG works against the scout. In essence the scout has a 41% chance to take zero damage and a 59% chance to get raped. That's why Dfield is Imo inferior to Quick-charge and Directional for dogfighting.

 

Dfield suffers in dogfights because when RNG fails on it. (which it will more than it doesn't) Dfield has too weak a shield arc (-30% shield arc) and it suffers from both a crappy regen rate and a crappy regen delay. Dfield scouts only have 1k per shiled arc and most weapons with the final teir set to increased shield damage do over 1k dps. Quads and heavies literally destroy a Dfield shiled arc in one hit. A quick-charge will be able to easily bring arc back before the next pass but the Dfield guy has to pray to RNG. And I prefer to not leave my life up to RNG.

 

Dfield is only superior in head-to-head fights, which unfortunately too many pilots are unable to get kills in anything other than a head-to-head. Plus the active ability incourages things like head-ons and hitting X tacitcs. Don't nerf the passive the active is the only issue. Change the active to something that does something to the shields and I can bet you will see a lot less dfielders.

 

-a quick-charge scout

Edited January 24, 2014 by Zoom_VI

[Sharee]

-a quick-charge scout

 

Yeah, i'm using quickcharge as well. The only real use i have for Dfield is to clear roaches tucked into a corner of satellite, sitting still, guns pointed into the only direction they can be approached from, finger hovering over trigger. That's when i pull out the DS novadive.

[Armonddd]

Yes, let's balance the game based on anecdotal evidence sprinkled with personal perception instead

 

Anecdotal over thousands of matches, perceptions from a dozen people? Yes, that's usually how game balance is reached.

[Sharee]

Anecdotal over thousands of matches, perceptions from a dozen people? Yes, that's usually how game balance is reached.

 

Thousands of matches? Sounds like you will need those averages after all.

[Itkovian]

Scout effective HP isn't much different from the effective HP of a strike fighter, even counting in *only* the evasion.

 

950 hull @ 41% evasion is 1610 HP

1450 hull @ 11% evasion is 1629 HP

 

If you count in damage reduction it's up to 1715 HP for the strike fighter.

 

And that doesn't count in the shields which are much stronger on the strike fighter, both shield strength and shield regen. Strongest shield you can get on a flashfire(if you want to keep the 41% evasion) is 1300. Strongest shield you can get on a starguard is 2340 (80% stronger than the scout, along with ~40% faster recharge).

 

The only saving grace for the scout is the increased maneuverability. I'd say the craft are pretty well balanced *with* the scout passive evasion.

 

But the shields ALSO get higher effective HP. Furthermore, shields start regenerating when they aren't hit for a while, which is a LOT more likely when you run an evasion build (and when you have the speed and maneuverability to end the engagement at will). That alone is a major edge as far as shields go: evasion builds get hit less often, therefore shields regen faster/more frequently.

 

But even if the numbers were equal when using effective values, that is STILL indicative of poor balance. The Scouts are supposed to have their higher speed and maneuverability balanced by being more fragile. So if their effective durability due to evasion puts them on equal footing with Strikes, then clearly there is a balance issue.

 

And that's not even factoring in the DF cooldown, which brings their survivability FAR higher anything a Strike can achieve (and also acts as a free shield recharge, most of the time), and of course the Scout offensive cooldown AND burst laser's inherent superiority. Put those in the equation, and clearly there is a balancing issue.

 

And let's be clear: anyone saying the game is balanced is flat out wrong. GSF was just released, and its "endgame" was never tested on PTS at ALL. Therefore there is _no way_ it can be balanced. There just wasn't enough data for the devs to make the necessary adjustments. Well, now there is, and that's why threads like these exist: to bring the balance issues to the Dev's attention.

 

Thank you.