Verain Posted April 12, 2014 Share Posted April 12, 2014 As the primary weapon on a gunship they make sense, a gunship can't really dogfight and since they can't outrun a scout or fighter it would make sense for them to have this powerful short range weapon. It fits the theme of gunships, crap defenses and mobility but superior fire power. It's odd that the T2 Gunship lacks them then, right? I really super like that the gunships have good guns. I mean, that's in their name. It's arguably the biggest part of it. They aren't just the railgun, and as you'd expect, they are threatening if they can actually face the target. But your conception of the burst laser cannon as kind of special is odd. Remember, the T1 Gunship doesn't even have a capacitor. But why does the T2 scout get these? 1- They are close range weapons whose damage falls off faster than other weapons. 2- They reward being able to play at close range versus resisting opponents. 3- They reward a playstyle only possible on a scout. 4- They trade the ranged of the other guns and the dps of the light lasers for very large packets of damage and armor piercing. 5- They are strategically interesting for both sides of the encounter. I have a Sting and a FF but I don't use BLC on either because it really felt like cheating when I did... ...what? You should use what you are most effective with. If this is BLC, then use that. Are you saying you win every soloqueue forever? BLCs have tradeoffs. Quad lasers offer a very solid attack range and dps. Light lasers offer more raw damage. I would agree that BLC are overall the best, of course, but they DEFINITELY shouldn't be removed from the T2 scout. That's quite clearly the ship they were created for. It Should only be available to the ship chassis with the longest range in the game? That's actually a reasonable position- if you make a ship whose concept is "heavy weapons", you'd expect it to actually have that. But obviously where he goes with that- "delete BLC from Type 2 scout" is ludicrous. So, first: You can't delete a component. People spent req on components, and chose ships because of components. Even nerfs to components need to be done very gradually. Remember that components are both levels and gear in this game, and there's not many components. No one can "delete ion railgun" or "delete burst laser cannon". They can't replace burst laser cannon with, say, laser cannon and not be ludicrous in doing so. If you LIKE that idea, it means you are mean spirited, period- "hee hee those guys THOUGHT they were buying the GOOD weapon but it was TOO GOOD by my personal standards and the devs listened to me so now they are left with a CRAP GUN serves them right snerk snerk!". That's worthless. And no, you can't just refund the req. It's quite reasonable to guess with access to burst laser cannon and blaster overcharge, that many type 2 scout pilots chose their ship because they want these components. You can't delete them without removing the ship that they spent tons of time perfecting. Second, you can't nerf a component too much. You can nerf it, for sure, but there's limits. I actually think that the rocket pod nerf was an overnerf for this reason- rocket pods are pretty fair now, but I dislike the delta being so large between them now and the form they were in when many players bought them. Should BLC be nerfed? I feel yes, slightly. Alternatively, they could simply up the rof while keeping the dps constant- thus lowering the damage per shot. It wouldn't take much of an adjustment here to address some of the issue. But if they don't change a thing... honestly, it's fine. BLC was a bigger concern before the bombers came out, because the two ships that had them were pretty much invaluable on a node, and the battle scout in particular was too much. Now that there's the concept of area denial, BLC are very different. I do wonder what would happen if they launched a bomber with them, though... because those BLCs just tear you up super quick, and that's not the purpose of a scout Citation needed! Why do you think a scout isn't about burst damage? Type 1 and Type 2 scouts both have access to rocket pods, burst weapons that pierce shields and are best used from an ambush. They also have access to targeting telemetry, a burst damage cooldown. They both have access to light laser cannon, which does the best dps- but only from short range. Type 2s ramp this up with a situationally superior blaster overcharge as a possible replacement for targeting telemetry, trading one burst for another, and the powerful burst laser cannon, trading a lesser burst for a greater one. It seems clear that scouts are mostly about burst damage. They are the barbarian- light armor, good mobility, rage, high damage. I don't think you followed my logic, what I'm saying is that BLCs are too powerful and only a ship class that can't fully use them should have access to them, if any. So why wouldn't you say something reasonable and maybe actually worthwhile, such as "increase BLC rof" or "nerf BLC by 10%" or whatever? Why go straight to ludicrous land? It's clear that this weapon is designed for the battle scout, and it's also clear that everyone in this thread has likely spent tons of req based on this assumption. GS having BLC (especially when strikers, the other dogfighters in the game, don't have them) makes zero sense. The gunship isn't a frame that only holds things that don't hurt you. It's a GUN ship. It has the GUNS. Heavy lasers. Burst laser cannon. Ion railgun. Slug railgun. Things that kill you dead. If you see a gunship facing you, you should be worried. BLC isn't a gun that fits on "only maneuverable ships". That being said- I nominate BLC or LLC for immediate inclusion on the Type 1 Strike Fighter, and have done so in like half a dozen threads. Damage reduction? Shields? Those can easely be circumvented (damage reduction might as well not exist in many cases) and now with the new patch missiles are deadlier then ever and every scout can get an extra missile lock break. They have few hits points, but scouts are possible the hardest ship class to kill and the T2 scout has the top burst dps to boot, I love my Sting and FF but they are clearly OP... This is, well, a battle scout cry post. I guess it's in the right place- the topic is "delete type 2 scouts" after all- but ugh. Damage reduction is odd to me because of how they did it. I like that it works against mines very effectively, but I dislike that so many weapons have 100% armor ignore. I mean, why can't quad laser talent 25% armor ignore, but burst laser cannon (the shotgun effect that clearly spreads its damage out) gets 100%? I don't understand this. More importantly, I dislike how damage reduction is all balanced around being added (it all stacks additively) to a charged plating build with its 60% active that is almost always up. Without charged plating, here's the DR numbers you can hit: 29% Type 2 or 3 scout, 34% Type 2 or 3 strike and type 1 gunship, 39% any bomber. These numbers are not that high when you remember that they ONLY effect hull. If some guns had partial armor pen, you could maybe have made them higher. gunships don't need to also be strong in the 0-3000 range. And they aren't. Burst laser cannon alone doesn't make you strong in a range. Railguns in particular don't help at all once a scout has closed. Burst laser cannon make sense for gunship- again, GUN ship. The point of that frame is that it trades mobility, speed, and survival for offense. Do not stand in front of gunship! Note that the one gunship that has BLC also lacks the capacitor, which makes a pretty big difference. GSF dev's have already answered that their balance is where they want it This actually puzzled me. BLCs definitely feel overtuned. But, maybe that's the point- they are a perk for the fighting zones they are good at. The devs were clear that they are ok with BLC. 4k, sweetheart. Just like Light Laser Cannon and Rapid Laser Cannon and both of them aren't even 50% effective as Bursts. Light laser has some advantages over BLC. LLC start with more dps, and by medium range have a bit more. By 3800 meters, LLC shots are hitting about the same as BLC, but much faster. The dropoff is much sharper with BLC than anything else. RFL is meant to be about power consumption, and is horrible. It's not really relevant to the convo tho- stick to LLC, a weapon meant to offer tradeoffs with BLC (and it does). (Ocula and it's pathetic 1 pixel hitbox) I have never noticed any issue shooting down the Orchid ships. Everyone has a very small hit box, why do you feel that the Ocula and Skybolt have smaller? I do not believe what you are saying is true. No. Devs said they are observing BLC's efficiency for now. There is nothing about "balance being where it is wanted". The quote I think was 10) Are you happy with Burst Laser Cannons balance? Pretty much. They are being watched carefully for balance. "Pretty much" means "yes". The thing they weren't happy with was ion railguns, which they nerfed. Obviously if they see them overperforming they will change them. But you and others asking for the deletion of battle scouts won't be why, and if anything their nerf will be SMALL. I would be shocked to see a 15% nerf- that would ruin every build that uses them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armonddd Posted April 12, 2014 Share Posted April 12, 2014 And they aren't. Burst laser cannon alone doesn't make you strong in a range. I think I said that. In fact, I'm pretty sure I said exactly that. I guess what I meant was, gunships are still dangerous in that range, and I'm not convinced it's necessary. I know, I know -- only bads are going to get blown up by bursts on a gunship, because they're attacking from the wrong vector. And that's a good thing, it means you can outskill your opponent. On the other hand, with how newbie-unfriendly the game currently is, is that necessary? I honestly don't know. Burst laser cannon make sense for gunship- again, GUN ship. The point of that frame is that it trades mobility, speed, and survival for offense. Do not stand in front of gunship! Citation needed -- I thought the gunship traded mobility, speed, and survival for range and burst damage, not just overall offense in every category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verain Posted April 12, 2014 Share Posted April 12, 2014 I guess what I meant was, gunships are still dangerous in that range, and I'm not convinced it's necessary. I know, I know -- only bads are going to get blown up by bursts on a gunship, because they're attacking from the wrong vector. And that's a good thing, it means you can outskill your opponent. On the other hand, with how newbie-unfriendly the game currently is, is that necessary? I honestly don't know. I'd say it's definitely needed. I should not be threatened by Terry Two-Ship and his Blackbolt of Baddycake on any ship of mine. He should not be able to attack head on without fear of death, given that he has so many ways to not do that. Citation needed -- I thought the gunship traded mobility, speed, and survival for range and burst damage, not just overall offense in every category. It's certainly not every category. The gunship has good guns. It's got a frame that can mount them. The Quarrel has the two best close range weapons, and the Comet Breaker has the best long range blaster and then the confusing laser cannon. Having a good weapon is definitely not the same as having good offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AchtAcht Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) I have never noticed any issue shooting down the Orchid ships. Everyone has a very small hit box, why do you feel that the Ocula and Skybolt have smaller? I do not believe what you are saying is true. And I have noticed, along with many people from my squadron. Ocula and Skybolt are considerably harder to hit than Flashfire or Sting. The only legitimate ways to take them down are either hitting someone near them with AoE Ion, or BLC point-blank or any type of missile/mine. Both Tier 2 Scout and Carel Market Scouts should be the same except visual differences - in fact, they aren't. There were at least two threads asking about issue with hitting them, same thing on "bug report" forums, so it's not only my and my friends imagination. "Pretty much" means "yes". The thing they weren't happy with was ion railguns, which they nerfed. Obviously if they see them overperforming they will change them. But you and others asking for the deletion of battle scouts won't be why, and if anything their nerf will be SMALL. I would be shocked to see a 15% nerf- that would ruin every build that uses them. From my experience if developers here didn't say "Yes." straightforward, they aren't happy. Especially when they are "watching carefully". They "watched carefully" knockdown on Operative's and Scoundre's openers. Light laser has some advantages over BLC. LLC start with more dps, and by medium range have a bit more. By 3800 meters, LLC shots are hitting about the same as BLC, but much faster. The dropoff is much sharper with BLC than anything else. RFL is meant to be about power consumption, and is horrible. It's not really relevant to the convo tho- stick to LLC, a weapon meant to offer tradeoffs with BLC (and it does). Maybe, maybe not. The fact is, both LLC and RLC leaves you small time window for reaction. BLC not. If they land two hits - you are dead. That's the issue with them. As for such powerful weapon they have amazing RoF, so there is no time for reaction. Even if you miss, you can shot again in 0,5 second. Even rail gun gives you opportunity to escape, because they can shoot once every two seconds (and full charge takes around 5 seconds), and their main weakness is LoS, because of range. In close combat, there is no LoS issue unless you let your enemy run to the object and fly around him - but damn, in Tier 2 Scout there aren't any ships which can escape you except Tier 1 Scout - which is dead after one hit, so it's highly unlikely that he will even have a chance to run. o7 Lindemann Edited April 13, 2014 by AchtAcht Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgrid Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Gunships? http://dfcsociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/AC130-gunship.jpg That is a gunship. Why the SWtOR gunships have shotguns still puzzles me.... Honestly, it seems like the gunships are an odd mix between a gunship and a gunboat. Gunship - Big, slow, armed to the teeth and then some. e.g AC-130. Gunboat - Small, fast, armed to take on ships far above their weight class. e.g PT boats of WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamascusAdontise Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) "full ______ mode, let's aim our guns to the west and see what we hit". o7 Lindemann" This is what I was referring to as offensive, nothing about GSF. (without going into details, this is just bad form) Show me where the bad gunship touched you Oh and I actually LOVE gunships, and have 0 problem dealing with them before or after the patch. I specifically hunt them down in any match, not to be a jerk, but because if left alone they can decimate a team. Their one and only issue IMO has been solved in the ion nerf. If I get killed by one its my fault, and I dont ***** about it. What I was referring to was the very recent rash of people upset about BLC (which is funny because mobility was nerfed and people are no long able to get OOR like they used to - the most noticeable of which would be GS who's mobility was severely hampered) sorry if I was mistakenly generalizing. As to BLC being easier to hit with, I hadnt taken into account the limited tracking penalty, so yah it actually is easier to hit with at certain ranges (thanks to armondd there) Earlier today threw the idea around on vent of removing 1000m from the max range of BLC making it a 0-3000 meter weapon. Not sure if this would be the right approach to balancing it (making it a true short range only weapon) But its an idea at least. Like I have said before talking about balancing BLC is one thing, asking it for to be removed from T2 scout is asinine IMO. I just dont like the argument "I got killed by X so X is OP REMOVE X NOW" I hear it so often in games that I just kind of shut off the thinking part of my brain and respond like an angry chimp. Are BLC a great choice, yes. Do they do a lot of damage, yes. Are they easier than other cannons, in some situations yes others no. Could they use a look, probably.... will they get it.... Meh I doubt it - maybe something small but it would have to be delicate. IMO there are already huge tradeoffs for BLC range being a big one. Edited April 13, 2014 by DamascusAdontise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuinMantha Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Gunships? http://dfcsociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/AC130-gunship.jpg That is a gunship. In terms of nomenclature, yes. In terms of the more common modern usage of the term, it's a light craft (like a helicopter) used to provide close air support for ground troops. Small aircraft, big scary cannon, that's a gunship these days. The SGS-45, SGS-41B, GSS-3 and GSS-5C totally qualify under that definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verain Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Gunships? http://dfcsociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/AC130-gunship.jpg That is a gunship. WOW what a terrible way to try to prove a nonexistent point. While the AC130 is technically a gunship, it's the EXCEPTION to have something that large. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunship "The term "gunship" is used in several contexts, most sharing the general idea of a light craft armed with heavy guns. The exception is the large AC-130." Get it??? That's the exception, not the rule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_B-25_Mitchell This frame was used with a gunship variant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_C-47_Skytrain As was this... And the helicopter ones... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-24 You literally took the largest plane ever designated as a gunship, the exception rather than the rule, and used that as your example. In any event, the gunships in this game are entirely appropriate for their role of carrying large armaments into battle, but not being the best at dogfighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Guys really, the reason they are called "gunships" in GSF are because somebody at BW decided that sounded good, not because of any real world definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thespis Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 As the primary weapon on a gunship they make sense, a gunship can't really dogfight and since they can't outrun a scout or fighter it would make sense for them to have this powerful short range weapon. It fits the theme of gunships, crap defenses and mobility but superior fire power. But why does the T2 scout get these? I dislike GS as much as the next guy, but shouldn't they get better weapons at a range they are not meant to fight then the guys specialized in close combat out to kill them? I have a Sting and a FF but I don't use BLC on either because it really felt like cheating when I did... As it stand now the T2 scout has access to BIS for every component, I think removing BLCs would be a good start to curve it's pretty obvious over budget components. Just my 2 creds. I can tell you that almost every Flashfire pilot in my guild uses the BLC and we LOVE it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgrid Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 (edited) In terms of nomenclature, yes. In terms of the more common modern usage of the term, it's a light craft (like a helicopter) used to provide close air support for ground troops. Small aircraft, big scary cannon, that's a gunship these days. The SGS-45, SGS-41B, GSS-3 and GSS-5C totally qualify under that definition. I wouldn't say "light" craft used for CAS, the A-10 is a gunship as well. The weapons on gunships are almost useless against airborne targets, outside of a couple of AA missiles that they may carry. A gunship is defined by the weapons it carries as well as how it uses them. WOW what a terrible way to try to prove a nonexistent point. While the AC130 is technically a gunship, it's the EXCEPTION to have something that large. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunship "The term "gunship" is used in several contexts, most sharing the general idea of a light craft armed with heavy guns. The exception is the large AC-130." Get it??? That's the exception, not the rule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_B-25_Mitchell This frame was used with a gunship variant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_C-47_Skytrain As was this... And the helicopter ones... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-24 You literally took the largest plane ever designated as a gunship, the exception rather than the rule, and used that as your example. In any event, the gunships in this game are entirely appropriate for their role of carrying large armaments into battle, but not being the best at dogfighting. How cute, you discovered wikipedia. You do realize that the C-47 and the B-25 were some of the largest aircraft of their time right? One being a bomber and the other a cargo plane as well and all. Edited April 13, 2014 by Morgrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Is it just me or should nomenclature arguments never have found their way into this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuinMantha Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Given that I have contributed to this madness, I can only stand back and gaze with horror upon what I have wrought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Given that I have contributed to this madness, I can only stand back and gaze with horror upon what I have wrought. QuinMantha is now an enemy of this thread! Execute Order 66. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzarr Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 BLC's could probably do with a slight redesign, I will gladly admit that they're overpowered and make playing my sting a little less fun with how easy it is to mow through people. What I think should have been done is follow the model of the shotguns/scatterguns in TF2. Said guns in said game don't shoot one single projectile, but a cluster of around 6 projectiles that spread. At close range a target will take the full force of the blast, but at longer ranges damage falloff happens naturally as the target will not take the full brunt of the shot. Following a model like this would solve several problems, you could get the extreme close range accuracy desired (many many shots) without the extreme damage(not necessarily every projectile has to hit), which is still a great advantage in a close range dogfight. Stationary targets would more often take the full force though. However, at long range you could see a sharper damage fall-off that (imo) needs to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgrid Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 QuinMantha is now an enemy of this thread! Execute Order 66.[/QUOTe] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7CRatBZBaY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanielStarr Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I do not shed a tear for those easy mode gunships losing anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SammyGStatus Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I do not shed a tear for those easy mode gunships losing anything. Go 31-0 in a GS and tell me how easy-mode is getting focused by 3 pilots at all times without having engine power for almost the entire match. If you think a GS is easy mode, then YOU aren't doing your job to harrass them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuinMantha Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 (edited) It's all fun and games until the bad guys are constantly inside 6k. Edited April 14, 2014 by QuinMantha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts