Bloodmark/Searpoint feedback

[Slivovidze]

The ship's single components do indeed look very underwhelming, yet I love designs of both and because I am the type of person that goes for looks, I will sure try to make my Spearpoint my main, or at least secondary ship (Nova being the main atm)

 

Honest, I have never used most of the new-ish components.

What would you think about the build I will try to put together on the next lines?

 

Primary - probably the normal Laser Cannon because the extra range and damage per shot, or Light Laser Cannon because I use it now and am happy with it.

Secondary - EMP or Ion missile. On my Pike, which I fly once every Sunday, I swap them around and kinda like both.

Engine - Interdiction Drive. You guys say it is bad part. I never used it or seen it used. But what I see, is "50 (60)% speed increase for 6 (9) seconds" - couldn't that give me the missing mobility mobility? True, I also see the part where it misses lock breaker, which is a huge downside, of course. Other choices would obviously be the turns, with speed upgrade probably.

Systems - That's Targetting Telemetry, because I use it now, I know what to expect and it is generally good. Or, Tensor Field. Another speed boost, 20 (24) seconds of 15 (30)% speed increase. Smaller increase over longer period. Also could be used as a weak booster recharge - +2 engine per second, for 20(24) seconds. Not the lifesaver we'd need against Ion gunships, but it would help on long runs, increasking our mobility.

Shield - And here I don't know any of these, so I dunno at all. ATM my favourite is engine converter on the type1 scout. Repair Drone doesn't mention its shield strength, or recharge speed, or recharge delay. Does it even provide shield? If it is a mediocre 100% shield (with no increases or decreases), 6s delay and semi-slow recharge, I'd go for that. Disto Field I know a bit, would choose that if I'd go for Interdiction Drive, for lock breaker. Shield Projector, looks like kind of AoE variant of Quick Charge.

Sensors - Range, because reasons.

Reactor - I have no clue. Would depend on which shield I choose.

Armor - Reinforced or Lightweight.

Capacitor - Most likely Damage, maybe Range if I'd use the regular Laser Cannon, fo shizzle.

 

Note that I'd not go like "here here my teammateys, have buffs", but I'd somehow rely on buffing myself whenever I'd need it (since I usually pug, and even when I group, I never use voicecom). I know that that's not the intended use, but I will try to do whatever it takes to squeeze at least above-average performance from that ship.

Whaddaya think? Note that my knowledge is about zero when it comes to figher, gunship or bomber parts, which are forced onto this scout, so be gentle when telling me why that wouldn't work.

[Bleeters]

Engine - Interdiction Drive. You guys say it is bad part. I never used it or seen it used. But what I see, is "50 (60)% speed increase for 6 (9) seconds" - couldn't that give me the missing mobility mobility? True, I also see the part where it misses lock breaker, which is a huge downside, of course. Other choices would obviously be the turns, with speed upgrade probably.

The problem with interdiction drive is activating it uses something like 40 engine power or so. I generally feel like I'd rather just have the extra afterburner time.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Bleeters

[Slivovidze]

And where the F are my Thrusters? Seriously, you take a basic SCOUT class ship, ADD ONE ENGINE (or two, if you are imperial), and REMOVE the possibility to modify THRUSTERS?

I mean, look at the scout ships.

- Flashfire. Seems like a folded up version for higher speed and maybe less maneuverability, with only reduced firepower because its weapons are on the front side of its, now folded, wings. Its sensors are probably on the ready, its light shielding and armoring ready to cover just about as much punishment to survive a hasty runaway. Yet, in GSF, it is THE heavy punching scout that doesn't even have sensors component, but runs with huge hitting weapons and tough shielding.

- NovaDive. Now the wings are unfolded, possibly reducing top speed and maybe increasing maneuverability, but most importantly unlocking all the firepower hidden in the front side. That's a scout ready to put up a fight, probably has a good shield too. But what do we get? ND is the fast one with sensors, one generally good shield projector, three mediocre lasers and only one secondary actually able to deal damage.

- Spearpoint. Now this baby looks like some speed freak took it to its garage and hardmounted additional engine to make it frickin fast while being able to unleash the whole damaging potential of unfolded wings. Of course, it is now probably barely able to turn, and the engines draw so much power that the reactor can barely support the weakest shield, but hell, SPEED! Sadly, BW thinks that the extra engine power would fit the best for the slowest scout with not that big firepower... And let's just take away it's Thrusters, to put it on par with bombers and gunships.

 

No friggin sense. Even though my fictional descriptions don't cross-match, I think that some model swapping would make sense. What is now NovaDive could fit as T3, what is now Spearpoint could fit as T2 and what is now Flashfire could work as a T1. (or swap the later two, as they both look fast in their own way)

[Slivovidze]

The problem with interdiction drive is activating it uses something like 40 engine power or so. I generally feel like I'd rather just have the extra afterburner time.

 

Oh well. That sucks, indeed. Is that cost after or before the cost lowering upgrade?

And even so, 60% more speed, combined with 320% from the afterburner itself, that would still get one to their target quite fast.

Of course, not optimal to use in tough situations, a.k.a. need to escape, need to catch up, or anywhere during any kind of fight (when boosters aren't full)

[The_Raven_Lord]

So far, the consensus is that it:

 

 

• Appeals most strongly to players who like its looks.

• Has the same mobility as a bomber.

• Only has a viable defensive role in Domination matches which will serve to diminish a team's offensive power.

• Is made up of all the least used components in the game.

• Buffs provided are underwhelming for the difficulty of providing them.

 

 

Suggested fixes:

 

 

• Drop Interdiction drive and add Barrel Roll or Retro Thrusters (Preferably both).

• Replace Thermite Torpedoes with a more useful option. (Cluster Missiles or Concussion Missiles)

• Increase the range of the buffs. (If the mobility problem is solved, this won't be as big of a problem)

• Put Thrusters on it. Drop sensors if you must.

• Replace underwhelming Sensor Beacon with Booster Recharge.

 

 

What we have here is a fighter that will be popular for its looks, and bring doom to whichever side has the most players who are playing it for that reason. It will lead to a lot of yelling in OPS Chat by people who want the team to select more useful ships, and a lot of other people who only play for the daily/weekly or fast XP who won't care.

 

Among the majority of experienced players, these things, if purchased at all, will gather dust in the hanger just like... hmmm... so that's why they call it a DUSTMAKER!

Edited March 5, 2014 by The_Raven_Lord

[Damgan]

Being a frequent GSF player (pretty much all I do these days) of (dare I say it?) moderate skill I am troubled by the way the design of new ships is going.

 

Firstly, there's a divide between 'Dogfighter' ships, the Scouts and Strike Fighters, and the 'Support' ships, the Gunships and Bombers. It isn't a gap that needs bridging. One poster put it very well when they said we don't need Scouts that do the Bombers' job. BW seems to be running out of ideas, badly.

 

Secondly, BW can't just keep reshuffling the existing pool of components and expect new playstyles to emerge. We can see this with Proton Torpedoes on the Dustmaker/Comet Breaker Gunships- they don't need Thermite Torpedoes to work, but a new 10,000m weapon, possibly some kind of Ion Torpedo, perhaps with lower cooldown. Likewise, new ships need new Major Components to bring about new roles and styles- not Interdiction Drives on Scouts.

 

Thirdly, there's a problem with the artwork. The models of the new Imperial ships are actually the models from which the Rycer, Quell, and Blackbolt are derived- with the result that they look like a merger of these ships which is more powerful than the originals. They aren't. Making one ship look clearly superior to the others will just lead to the 'low-experience player choices' which will wreck PUGs.

 

BW really should take these ships back to the drawing board for a serious overhaul and rethink of their design philosophy. Failing that, I fully intend to fire up my Mangler and start firing. Soon I'll have an awful lot of targets to choose from.

[The_Raven_Lord]

Being a frequent GSF player (pretty much all I do these days) of (dare I say it?) moderate skill I am troubled by the way the design of new ships is going.

 

Firstly, there's a divide between 'Dogfighter' ships, the Scouts and Strike Fighters, and the 'Support' ships, the Gunships and Bombers. It isn't a gap that needs bridging. One poster put it very well when they said we don't need Scouts that do the Bombers' job. BW seems to be running out of ideas, badly.

 

Secondly, BW can't just keep reshuffling the existing pool of components and expect new playstyles to emerge. We can see this with Proton Torpedoes on the Dustmaker/Comet Breaker Gunships- they don't need Thermite Torpedoes to work, but a new 10,000m weapon, possibly some kind of Ion Torpedo, perhaps with lower cooldown. Likewise, new ships need new Major Components to bring about new roles and styles- not Interdiction Drives on Scouts.

 

Thirdly, there's a problem with the artwork. The models of the new Imperial ships are actually the models from which the Rycer, Quell, and Blackbolt are derived- with the result that they look like a merger of these ships which is more powerful than the originals. They aren't. Making one ship look clearly superior to the others will just lead to the 'low-experience player choices' which will wreck PUGs.

 

BW really should take these ships back to the drawing board for a serious overhaul and rethink of their design philosophy. Failing that, I fully intend to fire up my Mangler and start firing. Soon I'll have an awful lot of targets to choose from.

 

Totally agree.

 

I'd love to have a developer come in and try to justify this travesty of a fighter to us. But as it stands, they don't communicate at all regarding GSF.

 

Just imagine the staff meetings in game when they try to sell this fighter for production.

 

Designer: "Good day everyone. In response to your request for a better Scout fighter we've gone back to the drawing board and come up with this."

 

*Everyone glares at the man as if he's crazy."

 

Navy Admiral: "So you've come up with a newer more powerful fighter that's less powerful and less maneuverable than our current models?"

 

Designer: "Correct!"

Edited March 5, 2014 by The_Raven_Lord

[Sindariel]

Did you guys watch the new trailer that introduces these new ships?

 

"Fast and evasive"

"Powerful and agile"

"Advanced speed"

"Devastating firepower"

"Total supremacy"

 

are their slogans to describe these ships.

[The_Raven_Lord]

Did you guys watch the new trailer that introduces these new ships?

 

"Fast and evasive"

"Powerful and agile"

"Advanced speed"

"Devastating firepower"

"Total supremacy"

 

are their slogans to describe these ships.

 

I can think of a few words that would make better and more honest slogans for these ships.

 

None of which can be uttered in polite company.

 

The video was pretty good though. Too bad they really dropped the ball on these new fighters and made them total crap.

Edited March 5, 2014 by The_Raven_Lord

[Zharik]

Honestly it is NO WONDER why the developers do not post on the GSF forums much. They don't want to get trolled by such a large percentage of you.

[Yndras]

So the Tier 3 Scout is a support fighter that will have a very hard time actually lending any support because it'll just be a flying bullseye. No thrusters for faster power regeneration or more endurance for getting out of trouble. No booster recharge to save you when you get hit by the Ion Rail Guns... no barrel roll to actually get out of the Gunship's line of fire in any sort of timely manner.

 

So what's this thing suppose to be good for? Raising the enemy team's kill count? I don't see this thing being deadly even in the hands of the top elite of pilots. It's certainly not for the beginners, or intermediates, or... seriously, who's this thing for?

 

I think you have missed the point of the ship. Its a new type of scout ROLE. Meaning you will have to play it differently, thus adding a new game-play style.

 

I can guarantee you one of those aces that you think wont be deadly in the hands of will be popping your engine bits all over the battlefield.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Yndras

[NotThatOne]

Well, I logged into PTS and looked at the components for the new ships, didn't get to fly, because no one else queued. I see potential.

 

Everyone panned the Comet Breaker, and the like as well. I do quite well in those ships, so I'll reserve judgment til I've actually flown them

[Bleeters]

Uh, why does the trailer show the scout model as having barrel roll?

[The_Raven_Lord]

Uh, why does the trailer show the scout model as having barrel roll?

 

Creating hype, false hope, and because if they showed what they actually play like, the trailer would be really boring.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Well I will say it seems puzzling with the scout since it looks like it's trying to combine some of the Type 1's recon ability with some of the Type 2's combat ability with the Bomber support class. I'm not too sure how well that will work out.

 

From what I'd seen on Dulfy's though it looks like they slapped many of the same major/minor components classes on both the Type 3 scout and striker. There are of course some variations within a component type based on what each class has access to but otherwise they look similar. (For example, the Type 3 striker has all the same missile options of the Type 3 scout with the addition of Proton Torpedoes as an option).

 

The main problem I see is that they're lowering the mobility of both Type 3s by giving them sensors instead of thrusters. Strikers don't have the base sensor stats or mobility to be as good as Type 1 scouts at recon so you're giving them the tools to perform a role the entire class is not well suited for. Similarly the Type 3 scout lacks the mobility of a Type 1 scout so while they might be able to get the same sensor range they still won't be as good at recon as Type 1s.

 

Overall I think both Type 3s should have thrusters instead of sensors. For one thing the scout and striker classes are dogfighters so if Type 3s are going to be performing the support role they need the mobility to both keep up with the other ships in their class and then have the agility to go toe to toe with the enemy scouts/strikers once they get there. Thrusters are really important in that regard, especially for sluggish strike fighters.

 

I'm iffy about giving Type 3s barrel role but I do think they should get retro thrusters. Retros have offensive uses as well as defensive so having retros will help give greater offensive capability comparable to Type 1 & 2 striker/scouts. I have serious doubts that anyone will take engine abilities that don't break missile locks since doing so forces you to tank missile hits. I also feel that, currently, the engine abilities that do break missile locks are all incredibly similar in what they do (for example the Type 3 scout's Koiogran and lateral both turn you 180 degrees and it's just a matter of choosing how you want to turn). Maybe giving them barrel role would give them too much mobility but I do think they need retros to give them more tactical options.

 

I think overall there is certainly potential in these ships but I think as it stands they may have component options that leave them unable to hold their own against the Type 1s & 2s of their respective classes. A support striker or scout is fairly useless if they lack the dogfighting capabilities to hold their own in a fight.

[Bleeters]

Honestly, I'm not convinced as to the value of sensors on any ship type. I'd rather have pretty much any other secondary system I can think of.

 

Giving them strikes is just... I have no idea. It's like they figured communication sensors sounded supporty and just slapped them in there, bringing the other two with them.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Bleeters

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Honestly, I'm not convinced as to the value of sensors on any ship type. I'd rather have pretty much any other secondary system I can think of.

 

Giving them strikes is just... I have no idea. It's like they figured communication sensors sounded supporty and just slapped them in there, bringing the other two with them.

 

I kinda think they wanted to make a ship like ARC-170 from the prequels since the Pub striker model looks similar and thus gave it sensors. But that doesn't really justify making a striker with sensors given how they function in game.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Morgrid]

....I don't think you guys are seeing how it comes together as a whole - instead you're looking at it part by part.

 

Tensor field + interdiction drive in the middle of a dogfight? You slow their team and cut their turning abilities while boosting those of your team.

 

I honestly can't wait for the new ships to come out so I can snap them up and get to have fun with them.

[Verain]

I think the amount of crying in here is kind of odd. I mean, you guys could legit be complaining about a bad ship. But, I'm really not sure.

 

Here's some bad arguments:

 

1)- "It's cute looking, so emps will be tricked into playing it!"

 

This is a bad argument. It cannot be true. Many ships look nice- they do not all get played to the exclusion of others. Noobs don't have the fleet req to spend anyway, and if they are such tard that they can't look through these ships and realize that they are support craft, they would not aide you no matter their ship choice.

 

 

2)- "It needs all these good components to compete!"

 

This is a better argument. It uses logic. After all, ships are just the sum of their components, and if the components are bad, so is the ship.

 

But, the playstyle makes a big difference. A Type 3 scout is clearly supposed to engage in a spearhead assault and use his cooldowns to aide his team and hurt his enemies. His secondary choices are NICHE choices- they are meant to be used as utility. That is why they have very deliberately not gained cluster or concussion, the general purpose weapons. A Type 3 strike is similar.

 

3)- "This ship needs burst laser and cluster and blaster over charge"

 

Clearly, the special components available on these ship types are meant to be their advantage. Their components are support or not the best. They are meant to be build differently than the dogfighter ships that they fly into battle with.

 

4)- "Everyone will pick one"

 

This seems unlikely. These ships will not be as strong solo, which a lot of players put value on. They also are clearly wonky in several ways.

 

 

 

 

The scout clearly wants to do things other scouts do not. Perhaps he flies into the middle as the poster above mentions, tensor fields, and interdiction drives, allowing his teammates to quickly turn and assault weakened enemies, while he relies on disto field to break missiles. He can drop a repair drone and play cautiously, using power dive and expecting peels while maintaining an area buff.

 

It is probably unfair to say that these suck, because we haven't seen them in play yet. We can imagine the repair drone and the lack of disto, and the lack of barrel roll (note many ships will switch out of barrel roll with the 20 second cooldown- powerdive will still give you 10s breaks).

 

 

 

It is possible that they are bad. It's possible that your strike strike scout squadron would benefit more from another battle scout that one of these, or more from another assault strike than command strike. But, I don't think it's cut and dry. I think a lot of you guys want them to be something different, and I just want them to be good at what they are.

[Verain]

Also note- we've seen a nerf of the sensor dampening components. This MAY mean that the 15km min range is being removed. If that is the case, then a sensor component ship may offer your team a lot more than you think, right? If a gunship can sneak up to 12k and not be seen, for instance, a strike with ranged sensors might really help.

[Morgrid]

Two voices or reason in this thread?

 

Looks like the world is ending.

[The_Raven_Lord]

My biggest problem with the T3 scout is that it lacks mobility and a clear role.

 

Right now, its heavily slanted towards a defensive play style like the Bomber. As I've said before, we don't want or need a Scout that will do a Bomber's job.

 

You have to look at the big picture and how a lot of people currently play the game. Having more ships that favor a defensive role will be unhealthy for the game because as it stands now, players are incentivized to just turtle up in one place and stay there. Even in Deathmatch.

 

My problem is that, I can think of so many things that are wrong with this design, but I just can't articulate them as well as I'd like, but I'm going to try.

 

Because of the missile choices the T3 scout can take, it can fill a much needed and I dare say vital role for dislodging a cluster of bombers from a satellite in Domination.

 

However,

 

The issue with the lack of mobility, just like a bomber, it'll be stuck there for a while until the engines are recharged. Unlike a bomber, it doesn't have the hull or shields to withstand any kind of serious attempts to destroy it. A regular scout can boost around almost indefinitely, but this one can not. When the action keeps shifting around and the usual frantic pace, it won't be able to keep up.

 

It'll be extremely vulnerable to Gunship attacks without a lot of places to take cover after granting its buffs.

 

So the play style will just become: "Pop out of hiding, grant buffs, go back into hiding."

 

If it's defending a satellite, and enemy bombers move in, it'll have to move away to make use of it's missiles to chase them off, but at that point, one hit from an Ion Rail Gun fired by a competent Gunship pilot who'll be looking for these fighters, and it'll be totally dead in the water and picked off. This also applies to AoE Ion Rail gun situations. It has no options to deal with that. On my Blackbolt, I'd just pop my booster recharge, get out of the danger zone and then asses the situation and decide how to proceed. In the T3 scout, you get killed by the Gunship and then your usefulness is at an end. Then you'll probably end up getting a more useful fighter out of the hanger to go engage those Gunships because the T3 scout simply doesn't have the tools to mount any meaningful offense.

 

The more of them you have on your team, the less powerful it'll become. Kinda the opposite of the situation with Bombers where the more of them you have, the strength of your defense/offense increases by orders of magnitude.

[Morgrid]

Right now, its heavily slanted towards a defensive play style like the Bomber. As I've said before, we don't want or need a Scout that will do a Bomber's job.

.

 

As a bomber pilot, I would love to have a more mobile ship that allows me to buff my team.

 

You may not, but you don't speak for everyone.

[The_Raven_Lord]

Two voices *of reason in this thread?

 

Looks like the world is ending.

 

This thread is full of very reasonable arguments. Maybe you should go through it all one more time with a more open mind?

[The_Raven_Lord]

As a bomber pilot, I would love to have a more mobile ship that allows me to buff my team.

 

You may not, but you don't speak for everyone.

 

It has the same mobility as a bomber, without any of the defenses. Enjoy.