One shots have got to stop

[Zoom_VI]

I have to agree on that. No wonder that what rules at the moment is BLC, Rails and Mines.

 

I am yet to play a PvP game where burst damage wasn't king....

[Armonddd]

I am yet to play a PvP game where burst damage wasn't king....

 

Well... yes.

 

In any situation where the enemies don't have abnormally large amounts of health (seriously, blizzard? six hundred seventy-six million?), damage now is better than damage later.

 

I'll take 1k damage straight up over 700 damage with a 700 damage dot any day.

 

In any situation where it's possible to burst things down, doing so is the best possible choice. Removing one enemy from the fight disrupts tactics and reduces incoming damage. Even taking someone to half health puts them on the defensive, which means you now have the initiative, which is an enormous advantage.

 

Damage per shot is a critical component of combat balance, and simply reducing damage per second isn't sufficient compensation.

[RipperTheMad]

oh mai i cant wait if they release infiltrator class with stealth and **** how everyone will gooo **** its imposible he just pop by me and instakills me **** nerf theeem nerf everything but mee

its gonna be hilarious

if they did this by your comments here we all would have same hp same damage ( hp like 10k and dmg like 100, so it would prevent ik), same components same range, no pickups no obstacles on maps ...

you guys just cry on forum hoping for a change .. gg guys gg

i now get why are some teams so stupid

[Altheran]

I am yet to play a PvP game where burst damage wasn't king....

 

Too bad you didn't see one yet.

 

I don't argue that burst will always be good, especially in coordinated team-play...

But normally in a PvP-focused environment, sustained damage should be rewarded with significantly better output... leaving two options : crush with burst, or with almighty power.

It makes burst "good", but not "king".

 

Ideally, if you're building your playstyle around coordination, and helping each other, you should aim for burst. If you're aiming to be good as a lone fighter, not relying on others, you should be looking for sustained.

 

There are two ways to screw the concept :

- not allowing "sustained" to have enough "oomph" to be good enough

- allowing burst be as good or nearly as good when facing sustained-based ennemies.

 

IMO, GSF is in the second "screwed situation" at the moment (and ground PvP in the first one, but ground game isn't mainly PvP focused).

[Loc_n_lol]

High burst damage weapons should probably not be allowed to crit... leave that to sustained fire cannons. Nothing should one-shot anything, not even a bypassing railgun on an evasion scout.

 

And as much as it is fun to give gunship wh**** a taste of their own medicine, that includes protorp crits.

[SammyGStatus]

High burst damage weapons should probably not be allowed to crit... leave that to sustained fire cannons. Nothing should one-shot anything, not even a bypassing railgun on an evasion scout.

 

And as much as it is fun to give gunship wh**** a taste of their own medicine, that includes protorp crits.

 

I one shot scouts? Against bombers, I've seen my slug crit for 2400. If you can build so that your primary weapons are crit'ing almost constantly, why can't I have a weapon that crits too? The only time it gets out of hand is when a GS has damage overcharge. Then, if left alone, the entire enemy field is cleared

[Altheran]

I don't mind that burst weapons can crit and actually burst. However, what I find unacceptable is that on the length, they do not fall behind sustained weapons.

[KorinHyvek]

I don't mind that burst weapons can crit and actually burst. However, what I find unacceptable is that on the length, they do not fall behind sustained weapons.

 

I think at least part of the problem is that GSF engagements are over so quickly that sustained isn't valuable. Perhaps if they added tougher targets like capital ships or even true gunshipss (heavily armed and armored ships controlled by multiple players), we might see sustained damage become more popular. Of course, that's a huge undertaking for the devs, so.. not in the immediate future.

Edited April 1, 2014 by KorinHyvek

[Zoom_VI]

I don't mind that burst weapons can crit and actually burst. However, what I find unacceptable is that on the length, they do not fall behind sustained weapons.

 

It wouldn't matter even if sustained theoretically came ahead, because no target is going to sit there and let you shoot them for prolonged periods. Now if everyone had like 2k more HP and a third of the current turning rates, then yes sustained would have value.

[Altheran]

It wouldn't matter even if sustained theoretically came ahead, because no target is going to sit there and let you shoot them for prolonged periods. Now if everyone had like 2k more HP and a third of the current turning rates, then yes sustained would have value.

 

That's why it's unacceptable. The game itself hinders any sustained game play. Making sustained type weapons not even capable of outperforming burst ones in optimal conditions is the dumbest thing ever.

[SammyGStatus]

Decreasing turning rate would be VERRRRRYYYY bad for dogfighters, or fans of dogfighting. My scout is a blast because of it's agility. Take that away and it'll be like cardboard boat racing - what's the point

[Loc_n_lol]

Decreasing turning rate would be VERRRRRYYYY bad for dogfighters, or fans of dogfighting. My scout is a blast because of it's agility. Take that away and it'll be like cardboard boat racing - what's the point

 

I don't think anyone is seriously advocating for reducing turn rates, he was just making a point.

But maybe if the targetting reticles for lasers were bigger or hit registry just more lenient in general...

[Altheran]

I don't think anyone is seriously advocating for reducing turn rates, he was just making a point.

But maybe if the targetting reticles for lasers were bigger or hit registry just more lenient in general...

 

I don't think anyone even mentionned reducing turning rates...

[Armonddd]

I one shot scouts? Against bombers, I've seen my slug crit for 2400. If you can build so that your primary weapons are crit'ing almost constantly, why can't I have a weapon that crits too?

 

Because the power of a weapon increases quadratically as its damage per shot increases linearly.

 

I thought we had all figured this out by now.

 

(Also because your weapon has ~7x the range.)

Edited April 1, 2014 by Armonddd

[SammyGStatus]

Because the power of a weapon increases quadratically as its damage per shot increases linearly.

 

I thought we had all figured this out by now.

 

(Also because your weapon has ~7x the range.)

 

I still don't understand all the algorithms that account for the GSF gameplay. Could you elaborate on what you mean (not the range part - I got that one )

 

I don't think anyone even mentionned reducing turning rates...

 

It wouldn't matter even if sustained theoretically came ahead, because no target is going to sit there and let you shoot them for prolonged periods. Now if everyone had like 2k more HP AND A THIRD OF THE CURRENT TURNING RATES, then yes sustained would have value.

 

Yes, it was mentioned.

Edited April 1, 2014 by SammyGStatus

[Altheran]

Yes, it was mentioned.

 

Ah okay. Already forgot.

[Zoom_VI]

That's why it's unacceptable. The game itself hinders any sustained game play. Making sustained type weapons not even capable of outperforming burst ones in optimal conditions is the dumbest thing ever.

 

Except its impossible to fix because the very mechanics of dogfighting are hostile to sustained weapons, the only way to make sustained viable would be if GSF did not include dogfighting.

[SammyGStatus]

GSF without dog fighting isn't worth building in sustained damage. Just like in ships in the series, you burst dps to down ur enemy, then on to the next one. You're not trying to keep the enemy ships alive at all. It makes sense that burst is favored. Utility is expanded by having DoTs such as the plasma vs a retreating scout (at 149000, u pop a fully charged plasma off, so while he's out of range, he's still taking dmg). Who knows what will happen when the stealth ships are released (if they are), but I can see burst being a primary fulfillment, followed by DoTs after

[Altheran]

Except its impossible to fix because the very mechanics of dogfighting are hostile to sustained weapons, the only way to make sustained viable would be if GSF did not include dogfighting.

 

So you're trying to say it's normal that even if you succeed to find a situation where you can fire on ennemies for a prolonged period of time, burst weapons are still the better ones ?

 

Are you trying to say it's normal that for each set of weapon, only one should be used regardless of your playstyle ?

 

Are you really trying to say that it's normal to give people choices if only one is viable ?

[Armonddd]

I still don't understand all the algorithms that account for the GSF gameplay. Could you elaborate on what you mean (not the range part - I got that one )

 

In any situation where it's reasonable to do so, burst damage is king. The "old" adage is "damage now is better than damage later". (I say old, but it's really from the D&D 4e forums, so I guess it's not that old.) I think we've all seen proof of this in various games over the years.

 

In GSF specifically, this can be largely attributed to shield regeneration delay. When the majority of weapons have a fire rate significantly under one second per shot, waiting six seconds for your shields to regen is an eternity. Your best realistic case is turbo reactor versus fully charged railgun, but even then, no ship regenerates more than 20% of its shield pool in one second, so large reactor is superior. And, of course, that completely ignores the other 14 or 22 people in the match.

 

Because of this and the current ratio of damage output versus effective hull/shield strength, the best way to increase survivability is to not get hit in the first place. This in turn leads to big single hits being superior to multiple small hits, since with longer reload times you have more time to perfect your aim.

 

That's my main point, but I'll use some completely arbitrary and unrealistic numbers to try to present it from another angle.

 

Given the current meta, let's pretend that we can quantify weapon_threat as a value equal to (weapon_damage_per_shot^2)/1000. The higher a weapon's threat, the more powerful and dangerous it is, and the more important it is to avoid it (and we'll also say that a weapon with 1000 threat is twice as scary as a weapon with 500 threat).

 

So, let's look at a few. I'll compare minimum damage (long range with no upgrades) to maximum damage (point blank crits with bonus damage to shields/hull). We'll assume every weapon can crit (because concentrated fire exists), but only at 50% surge (because targeting telemetry is an exclusive mechanic).

 

LLC: 208 minimum damage to 715 maximum damage, 43 minimum threat to 511 maximum threat.

QLC: 255 minimum damage to 745 maximum damage, 65 minimum threat to 555 maximum threat.

HLC: 315 minimum damage to 764 maximum damage, 99 minimum threat to 584 maximum threat.

 

 

Now obviously these numbers are wonky because I've spent like five minutes on this model, but they illustrate the concept well enough.

 

Let's compare the bursty weapons. For slug, we'll assume fully upgraded with T5 left, and fully charged. BLC will make the same assumptions as above.

 

BLC: 635 minimum damage to 2534 maximum damage, 403 minimum threat to 6,421 maximum threat.

Slug non-crit: 1600 damage, 2,560 threat

Slug Crit: 2400 damage, 5,760 threat.

 

That's a lot of threat.

 

There's a lot of flaws with this model. BLCs are overpowered, but they're not 4-11x times better than HLCs, for example, and of course damage per shot is only dominant in most situations, not all of them. Further, quadratic functions are a "rich get richer" kind of thing, and I'm therefore over-representing the power of the bursty weapons. Still, I hope you get the idea.

[Zoom_VI]

So you're trying to say it's normal that even if you succeed to find a situation where you can fire on ennemies for a prolonged period of time, burst weapons are still the better ones ?

 

Are you trying to say it's normal that for each set of weapon, only one should be used regardless of your playstyle ?

 

Are you really trying to say that it's normal to give people choices if only one is viable ?

 

Options are fine, but if everything else is equal burst is paramount over sustained because sustained isn't viable in situation where your time-on-target is barely a second.

 

Now you can give options in other ways such a differences in range, tracking penatlies and RoF.

[Armonddd]

Options are fine, but if everything else is equal burst is paramount over sustained because sustained isn't viable in situation where your time-on-target is barely a second.

 

Now you can give options in other ways such a differences in range, tracking penatlies and RoF.

 

I think his problem is that sustained isn't better even in a biased situation. When I land a sab probe on someone, it takes forever to get a kill with LLCs, whereas bursts would get the kill in two or three shots.

[Zoom_VI]

I think his problem is that sustained isn't better even in a biased situation. When I land a sab probe on someone, it takes forever to get a kill with LLCs, whereas bursts would get the kill in two or three shots.

 

Really? I don't think LLC is that bad

 

Rapids tho....

183, 183, 183, 183.....

[Kuciwalker]

In any situation where it's reasonable to do so, burst damage is king. The "old" adage is "damage now is better than damage later". (I say old, but it's really from the D&D 4e forums, so I guess it's not that old.) I think we've all seen proof of this in various games over the years.

 

Do you post in 4e charop???

[okiobe]

I think his problem is that sustained isn't better even in a biased situation. When I land a sab probe on someone, it takes forever to get a kill with LLCs, whereas bursts would get the kill in two or three shots.

 

I don't feel BLC synergizes well with sabotage probe. If they happen to boost while it's in the air when the get disabled you could be far out of range. By the time you get into and effective range for BLC the disable has all but worn off. I haven't maxed lights and sab probe on my new ship to see how it works upgraded but in the few engagements I've had they work well together.