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

[Warhams]

Wrong thread post Edited January 27, 2014 by Warhams
Wrong thread , oops

[Altheran]

Slug gets the frankly insane combination of inherent damage, range, shield penetration, and armor penetration, all in huge amounts. Bypass helps with that, sure, but it's not as big a culprit as the slug itself.

 

Given the bypass amount, the armor ignore, making it an all purpose weapon (Who really need to destroy the shields first, by using the Ion we're given with that Gunship ?) and given it's preparation time, I've been thinking that this weapon is much like concussive missiles.

Sure it doesn't have the shot locked-on and can't be used on the move, and you can't add blaster shots to increase fire power. But it doesn't have all the inconvieniences of a lock broken by any random objects like a satellite solar panel (can maintain the charge and unload), the target don't have any warning and don't have a button to make it fail miserably, and it has range.

 

So, lately I've been thinking that its damage output should be more or less the same than a concussive missile.

Add to that, Plasma dealing worse damage on Shields (worse than now, not worse than slug) but still as powerful on hull, and that way, Ion railgun would be interesting on its own, not needing all these tricks of AoE, and debuffs to be appealing.

I think it would make a much more coherent set of rails.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Altheran

[DarthVindictus]

I'm not going to quote Brewski, he typed too much; in that short story he did make one good point. Vs scouts and gunships, to whom sees the other first wins. If a scout sneaks up and hits X right behind a gunship, it's dead; if a gunship gets a bead on a scout from a distance, it's dead. A dogfight when both parties is aware of the other, because of evasion, it's a fair fight. If you don't understand that evasion is in no way op, you can't adapt and instead of thinking you're just getting angry.

 

No in a dogfight between the scout and the gunship, the gunship is dead, as the scout can fly literal circles around them and a gunship does not have lock on missiles to supplement damage, and would have to go completely still to use their railguns, putting them at an even greater disadvantage. You can only fight scouts in close range with your burst lasers when they're already almost dead.

[Nempo]

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.

 

Based on your own definitions, and the fact the GSF is still not fully rolled out (it will be fully unveiled and fully in the game completely when bombers are available...till then it is just playable demo) luck based is the better option as it is always better to pull in novice players than it is to keep the minority entrenched vets happy in a game that is essentially FPS/twitch based.

[Armonddd]

Based on your own definitions, and the fact the GSF is still not fully rolled out (it will be fully unveiled and fully in the game completely when bombers are available...till then it is just playable demo) luck based is the better option as it is always better to pull in novice players than it is to keep the minority entrenched vets happy in a game that is essentially FPS/twitch based.

 

That's a great way to get people to play for a few months and then leave. It's not how you make a good game.

[Nempo]

That's a great way to get people to play for a few months and then leave. It's not how you make a good game.

 

Think about it...a twitch based playstyle inside of a game designed around pure math and random luck percentage chances. Even the best geared tank can get a huge unlucky string of rolls and get decimated by a boss despite having near perfect defenses. This is, at the end of the day, an MMORPG and not x-wing vs. tie fighter or CoD. Thus by leaving in things that feel familiar helps to get people to move more into the twitch based game.

 

BTW...if that was true to form honest starfighter style design and total twitch play...NOTHING would get past a gunship. By definition of a rail gun it would continue through anything it hit...line up multiple ships and blow right through them all. Also...scouts would be one hit kills from ANY missile and 2-3 hit kills from blasters if you wanted this to be true to movie specs. Strikes would be able to take repeated punishment and gunships would be extremely vulnerable to missile fire while nigh impervious to blasterfire. THAT would take far more skill to fly around in if we used the actual specs of the weapons and ships from lore and put them into game and actually forced people to bob and weave without any extra guidance systems in place.

 

What we have...is a middle ground between twitch gameplay and percentage luck based combat from standard MMO fare. If evasion gets forced out completely you will find it harder to actually get people to play because the heavy/mid/light armor style and fight style distinctions between scout (agile) strike (heavy armed close range) gunship (long range) and bomber (battle support) fit archetypes of a standard MMO group.

[Nemarus]

Think about it...a twitch based playstyle inside of a game designed around pure math and random luck percentage chances. Even the best geared tank can get a huge unlucky string of rolls and get decimated by a boss despite having near perfect defenses. This is, at the end of the day, an MMORPG and not x-wing vs. tie fighter or CoD. Thus by leaving in things that feel familiar helps to get people to move more into the twitch based game.

 

BTW...if that was true to form honest starfighter style design and total twitch play...NOTHING would get past a gunship. By definition of a rail gun it would continue through anything it hit...line up multiple ships and blow right through them all. Also...scouts would be one hit kills from ANY missile and 2-3 hit kills from blasters if you wanted this to be true to movie specs. Strikes would be able to take repeated punishment and gunships would be extremely vulnerable to missile fire while nigh impervious to blasterfire. THAT would take far more skill to fly around in if we used the actual specs of the weapons and ships from lore and put them into game and actually forced people to bob and weave without any extra guidance systems in place.

 

What we have...is a middle ground between twitch gameplay and percentage luck based combat from standard MMO fare. If evasion gets forced out completely you will find it harder to actually get people to play because the heavy/mid/light armor style and fight style distinctions between scout (agile) strike (heavy armed close range) gunship (long range) and bomber (battle support) fit archetypes of a standard MMO group.

 

But no ground class can get 41% Defense without sacrificing offensive potential.

 

The problem in GSF is that all sources of Evasion are purely defensive choices. Taking Distortion Field doesn't prevent you from taking Cluster Missiles or Burst Laser Cannons. Taking Vector as a crew member for 6% Evasion doesn't prevent you from taking Pierce for 6% accuracy.

 

In the ground game, Defense, Shield, Surge, Crit, Accuracy are all on the same budget. It's a zero-sum game. Excel in one? That means you sacrificed the others.

[elthenar]

Think about it...a twitch based playstyle inside of a game designed around pure math and random luck percentage chances. Even the best geared tank can get a huge unlucky string of rolls and get decimated by a boss despite having near perfect defenses. This is, at the end of the day, an MMORPG and not x-wing vs. tie fighter or CoD. Thus by leaving in things that feel familiar helps to get people to move more into the twitch based game.

 

BTW...if that was true to form honest starfighter style design and total twitch play...NOTHING would get past a gunship. By definition of a rail gun it would continue through anything it hit...line up multiple ships and blow right through them all. Also...scouts would be one hit kills from ANY missile and 2-3 hit kills from blasters if you wanted this to be true to movie specs. Strikes would be able to take repeated punishment and gunships would be extremely vulnerable to missile fire while nigh impervious to blasterfire. THAT would take far more skill to fly around in if we used the actual specs of the weapons and ships from lore and put them into game and actually forced people to bob and weave without any extra guidance systems in place.

 

What we have...is a middle ground between twitch gameplay and percentage luck based combat from standard MMO fare. If evasion gets forced out completely you will find it harder to actually get people to play because the heavy/mid/light armor style and fight style distinctions between scout (agile) strike (heavy armed close range) gunship (long range) and bomber (battle support) fit archetypes of a standard MMO group.

 

This is a terrible argument.

 

Removing evasion won't make scouts fair game to gunboats, not even close. It's hard enough to land hits on scouts without counting evasion. They are so fast that it's extremely hard to keep a good scout pilot in your threat range. Remember, if you get much closer to scouts than max range and they notice you, they can close the distance in a second and curbstomp you. If you don't one hit them, you won't get a second shot on them.

 

What part of a railgun says it would automatically go through unlimited ships btw? It's just a fancy rifle at the end of the day. Mass times velocity, nothing more.

 

I don't care if it is part of an MMO. This IS a twich based game. But evasion alone isn't my problem. It's that distortion field provides up to 6 seconds of immunity to guns, none of the other shield systems come close to that level of protection. It's that evasion stacks so that that it is categorically superior to every other form of defense.

 

Lastly, tt's that scouts can have top shelf firepower, speed, agility AND defense at the same time.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

But no ground class can get 41% Defense without sacrificing offensive potential.

 

The problem in GSF is that all sources of Evasion are purely defensive choices. Taking Distortion Field doesn't prevent you from taking Cluster Missiles or Burst Laser Cannons. Taking Vector as a crew member for 6% Evasion doesn't prevent you from taking Pierce for 6% accuracy.

 

In the ground game, Defense, Shield, Surge, Crit, Accuracy are all on the same budget. It's a zero-sum game. Excel in one? That means you sacrificed the others.

 

It's also a completely different combat mechanic. On the ground if you miss it's no biggie, as soon as the GCD is over you can attack again until one of you is dead. You miss a handful of shots in GSF and your few second window of opportunity is gone until you can dogfight back into a firing position. That could take a second or many seconds and if you didn't get through their shields the damage you did do may have been completely erased with the regeneration of shields.

[Ramalina]

Think about it...

 

stuff that doesn't need to be reposted as quotes three times in a row.

 

.

 

I think you're either unaware of or completely ignoring that there's a difference between first person shooters where twitch skill is a good thing, and combat flight sims where twitch style input pretty much guarantees that you will miss your shots and greatly increases the chance that you'll die in a crash. If you really have to fly your guns onto your target the task of lining up a shot becomes hard enough that you don't need any sort of RPG defensive mechanics.

 

What makes GSF such a strange beast is that it has RPG mechanics, FPS twitch style input, and a battlespace and maneuvering system that's standard for oversimplified air combat simulations.

 

It makes me think they should have had an intern named Igor cranking up a lightning rod when they compiled the code for the first time.

 

You can actually separate out preferred game style by the complaints about GSF.

 

MMORPG players: hate having to maneuver to hit a target.

FPS players: hate RNG misses.

Flight/Space sim players: Hate input controls, RNG misses, RPG cooldown mechanics, slow missile locks.

 

Also, being something of a dinosaur, I'll point out that A-wings are tougher than, and railguns are less effective than you're giving them credit for. It's heavy missiles and one starfighter class ship per railgun slug (at least with a GSF sized railgun).

 

I do think your general point stands though.

 

A really good combat space sim just about demands stick and throttle for input, and the learning curve for flying and shooting is quite steep. I forget how many flight training missions the original X-wing game had, but it was a lot, and if you weren't a good enough pilot to complete them you could forget about being able to finish any of the campaign missions. Bioware chose to go with accessibility over purism, and there's no question that for SWTOR that's the right design choice.

 

Not that that will stop anyone from grumbling about it.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Ramalina

[Zharik]

Removing evasion won't make scouts fair game to gunboats, not even close. It's hard enough to land hits on scouts without counting evasion. They are so fast that it's extremely hard to keep a good scout pilot in your threat range. Remember, if you get much closer to scouts than max range and they notice you, they can close the distance in a second and curbstomp you. If you don't one hit them, you won't get a second shot on them.

Well at least you admit that you can 1shot scouts as the game stands right now... from 15km... and running dampener sensors gives you invisibility until you get within 15km. Oh and how do you know that all your misses are not from evasion, and that is the ONLY thing that is making you miss now?

 

But evasion alone isn't my problem. It's that distortion field provides up to 6 seconds of immunity to guns, none of the other shield systems come close to that level of protection.

 

I was killed mid barrel roll WHILE distortion field was running, supposedly a 146% evasion total and still got railgunned...

[dancezwithnubz]

Removing evasion won't make scouts fair game to gunboats, not even close. It's hard enough to land hits on scouts without counting evasion. They are so fast that it's extremely hard to keep a good scout pilot in your threat range. Remember, if you get much closer to scouts than max range and they notice you, they can close the distance in a second and curbstomp you. If you don't one hit them, you won't get a second shot on them.

 

codswallop.

 

if evasion was completely removed and no other balance added, scouts would be totally stomped on.

 

i'm a scout pilot myself, Blackbolts coz I'm different. i used to get all hot under the collar about gunships, then I started flying one. i'm pretty good at lining up shots with a railgun (i very, very rarely miss a strike fighter). if this was 100% FPS Twitch CoD style, scouts would have a life expectancy of a couple of seconds.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

if evasion was completely removed and no other balance added, scouts would be totally stomped on.

 

Remove evasion stat and replace light armor's buff with (when fully leveled) a 5-10% buff to turning & engine speed (each). Let that stack with the existing buffs to engines/turning.

 

It enhances the tools for a pilot to take manual evasion. If you're a good pilot then it works out well for you, if you're not that great with manual evasion something that buffs health or damage reduction directly is probably a better choice.

 

Adjust weapon damage and hull/shields accordingly with the removal of evasion.

 

if this was 100% FPS Twitch CoD style, scouts would have a life expectancy of a couple of seconds.

 

And in that case (being like CoD) strikers would also get 1 shotted as, to my knowledge, headshots kill in one blast against everyone. Scouts wouldn't have anything special to complain about in that scenario.

 

However you can have 100% twitch without death lasers that kill in a single hit. Weapons/heath can be adjusted so 1 shots aren't possible with any weapon and still have it be a 100% twitch game. Twitch is just the idea of replacing RNG mechanics with mechanics that reward and rely on player skill.

 

My suggestion above would do that. Scouts who learn manual evasion would be in good position, those that want to pretend they're in a striker and tank damage not so much.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[-Streven-]

Evasion just isn't as strong as some are making it out to be. I do believe a few minor buffs to other sheild options should be considered to make them as attractive as distortion but really distortion sheilds aren't hard to beat unless you're determined to fly head on at every scout you see with little regard for tactics. Evasion as a passive skill is not helping out nearly as much as I think some people give it credit for. You probably are just missing. Latency is the bigger culprit I'm afraid. If you nerf evasion much it becomes useless. It is not OP. I tear through scouts when they are foolish enough to let me line up my shots. Maybe its a problem for snipers occasionally but hey, life's tough all over. Get over it. I think the real problem is many people just want your gameplay style exclusively to make you God and any reasonable counter to it to be removed. To that I also say get over yourself.

 

I'm also sick and tired of people calling for the removal of gunships. As a class they are balanced. They are snipers. They act and function as snipers. The tactical decisions you have to make in game simply require you to deal with the fact that there are snipers in the game. In all the arguments against gunships and railguns being made, no matter how sophisticated, when you break them down what they amount to is people saying "I don't like snipers". That's it. I have yet to hear of any real balance problem. If you let the gunship stay at range and line up shots undisturbed he's going to snipe you. That's the point. If you sneak up on him or barrel roll to close distance, not straight at him mind you, you will clean his clock. Thats how snipers are supposed to work and in this game it works exactly that way. So the real argument is, should the game have snipers? As a primarily nova pilot who likes sabo probes and hates being sniped I say YES. Gunships are usually my easy kills and they add variety and interesting tactical gameplay elements. The only time I find gunships difficult is when they chain but if two or more are focusing on me that's allowing my team plenty of time to cap satellites. Objective accomplished.

 

The only nerf I'm in favor of is a slight reduction to damage and range of burst lasers.