New Gunship Variant makes T1 and T2 Strikes obsolete

[Nemarus]

 

Gunship:

Primary: Burst, Laser, Light Laser

Secondary (choose 2): Cluster, Slug, Interdiction Missile, EMP Missile

Shields: Directional, Feedback, Fortress, Distortion Field

Engines: Koiogran, Power Dive, Interdiction Drive, Barrel Roll

Capacitor, Magazine, Reactor, Thrusters

 

Bomber:

Primary: Laser, Quad, Heavy, Light Laser

Secondary: Proton, Concussion Missiles, Cluster Missiles

Systems: Missile Sentry Drone (pub) or Interdiction Sentry Drone (imp), Ion Mine, Concussion Mine

Shields: Overcharged, Charged Plating, Directional

Engines: Shield Power Converter, Power Dive, Interdiction Drive

Capacitor, Magazine, Reactor, Thrusters

 

Well, the new Gunship Variant just about removes any reason to ever play a T1 or T2 Strike again.

 

You've got BLC's for short range and undersat fighting, Slug Railgun for long range, and then your choices of EMP Missile (if you want to be a Bomber counter), or Cluster Missile (if you want more short-range punch). Hard to say much about Interdiction Missile, but it it seems like it would be a great combo to kill people with BLC's given its short range and lock-on time.

 

On the shields front, the new Gunship has access to Distortion Field and Directional Shield, the two best shields in the game (and a Reactor to pair with them), and it's got Barrel Roll and Power Dive, the two best engines.

 

And it has a very strong set of Components--perhaps the ideal set for the ship (which is rare).

 

And let's not forget that, as a Gunship, it has 5% base DR (like a Strike), and its base shield capacity and regen is barely less than the Strikes', and it has longer Communication range.

 

The only place the Strike has it beat is in base speed, base maneuverability, 5% more Evasion, 200 more base hull. Those aren't insignificant, but I hardly think they make up for the combo of BLC's/Railgun/ClusterMissile/DistortionField.

 

Alas, the Gunship does not have Charged Plating--that would've made it an amazing counter to SIM's. Even without it though, it could end up being the best counter available, due to having both EMP Missile and BLC's--something no other ship has. It can basically take out turrets with its railgun, then while rushing in drop an EMP Missile. Then park on the Bomber's butt (because this Gunship has Turning Thrusters) and unload with BLC's. At worst, the Gunship will take a single Seismic Mine to the face.

 

Also, the ship model looks pretty sweet on both sides. At least on the Imperial side, the new Gunship looks way cooler than a Rycer or Quell.

 

So what role are Strikes supposed to play again?

Edited May 1, 2014 by Nemarus

[Kuciwalker]

Well, the new Gunship Variant just about removes any reason to ever play a T1 or T2 Strike again.

 

No. Strikes still fly way better.

 

And it has a very strong set of Components--perhaps the ideal set for the ship (which is rare).

 

No. Armor >> Magazine.

 

And let's not forget that, as a Gunship, it has 5% base DR (like a Strike), and its base shield capacity and regen is barely less than the Strikes'

 

Also less health and no base evasion.

 

and it has longer Communication range.

 

lololololol who cares

[Kuciwalker]

I think we will find that cluster missiles are weakish on a gunship because it will have a harder time acquiring the lock.

[SammyGStatus]

Obsolete or not, the first ship I mastered on Renegade was a Star Guard. I'll never stop playing that thing All classes are still viable. We'll just need to watch the pieces fall into place. Edited May 1, 2014 by SammyGStatus

[Nemarus]

No. Strikes still fly way better.

 

Strikes are exactly 6.89% faster and 5.33% more maneuverable. I'd hardly call that "way".

 

No. Armor >> Magazine.

 

 

Not for someone with a Railgun. One could argue that Armor would be better than a Capacitor, since the Capacitor is only going to benefit the Primary Weapon. Then again, when that Primary Weapon is BLC's, Capacitor starts to sound pretty good.

 

Also less health and no base evasion.

 

Which I called out:

 

The only place the Strike has it beat is in base speed, base maneuverability, 5% more Evasion, 200 more base hull. Those aren't insignificant, but I hardly think they make up for the combo of BLC's/Railgun/ClusterMissile/DistortionField.

 

 

Though yes, the bit about the Communications range was a joke

[Kuciwalker]

Strikes are exactly 6.89% faster and 5.33% more maneuverable. I'd hardly call that "way".

 

When it comes to something like maneuverability, direct experience trumps the statistics. That 5.33% extra maneuverability means a lot in a dogfight.

 

Not for someone with a Railgun.

 

Yes, actually. Given the choice on my Quarrel I'd be far more comfortable giving up the magazine than the armor.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Kuciwalker

[Lendul]

The combination of no armor, less speed & less maneuvering will show a noticeable decrease in survivability. However this ship I believe will come out in the positive in what I call the TTLR(time to live ratio) which is your time to live when being targeted opposed to your target's time to live once you start your assault. So the real question is will this ship's TTLR be superior to T1and T2 strikes. And does it's kit allow for outplay on the users end. Edited May 1, 2014 by Lendul

[DresG]

Obsolete or not, the first ship I mastered on Renegade was a Star Guard. I'll never stop playing that thing All classes are still viable. We'll just need to watch the pieces fall into place.

 

While I won't stop flying my Star Guard, I must disagree with the pieces falling into place argument. Giving a single ship the best Primary Weapon (Bursts), the two best Secondary Weapons (Slug and Clusters) and the best defense and engine components (Distortion and Power Dive) is plain stupid, specially when you consider that this ship, designed for very long range "encounters", will have the option of fighting back effectively against pretty much all the other ship roles.

 

In a game that places emphasis on the Rock/Paper/Scissor design, it makes no sense to have a ship that can be Rock and Paper at the same time.

[SammyGStatus]

While I won't stop flying my Star Guard, I must disagree with the pieces falling into place argument. Giving a single ship the best Primary Weapon (Bursts), the two best Secondary Weapons (Slug and Clusters) and the best defense and engine components (Distortion and Power Dive) is plain stupid, specially when you consider that this ship, designed for very long range "encounters", will have the option of fighting back effectively against pretty much all the other ship roles.

 

In a game that places emphasis on the Rock/Paper/Scissor design, it makes no sense to have a ship that can be Rock and Paper at the same time.

 

True, those are great armaments, no doubt about it. But the lack of lightweight armor means 10% less evasion, so the D Field may not be the best fit for this particular build (we're gonna have to wait and see). I think it's definitely a power house, but to discount an entire class of ship before even trying them / extensively testing their applications seems a little rash (not in a bad way, but in the way that we'll know more as we see what they can do). Patience, fellow Padawans

 

Also, if I'm against a good scout in my GS today, I'm not going to be able to hit him before he closes the gap. Then, even with my +10 to turning, I'm still dead in the water. I still stand by the statement that if you can't hit someone, it doesn't matter how hard you can hit. The missiles will make the scout move a bit more, but I don't think that this will be giving the GS THAT much of an edge. Scouts will still retain their infamous evasion, and will still have a better turning rate / speed capability.

 

Sooooooo, I definitely need to give it time to sink in under multiple scenarios before I cast my judgement, but this bit of news is at least a counter to those zippy little fruit flies

Edited May 1, 2014 by SammyGStatus

[Nemarus]

When it comes to something like maneuverability, direct experience trumps the statistics. That 5.33% extra maneuverability means a lot in a dogfight.

 

 

 

Yes, actually. Given the choice on my Quarrel I'd be far more comfortable giving up the magazine than the armor.

 

Is that potentially because you're used to comparing a Strike with Thrusters to a Gunship without them?

 

Have you flown a T3 Strike much? It feels pretty similar to a T1 Gunship in terms of speed and maneuverability.

 

And as for Components, the T3 Gunship has the exact same Components as the T1 Strike. So while it might not be a "perfect" mix (only the T2 Scout can claim that), none of its Minor Components are particularly wasted or contradictory, like other ship component mixes have been.

 

For example, the new T3 Bomber has a Reactor instead of Armor, which is a total waste given the Bomber's natural hull and DR (which you want to further stack with an Armor component). Adding insult to injury, the T3 Bomber can take Charged Plating ... but without an Armor component to combine with it, taking Charged Plating would be suicide, since even when it's active you're still at a mere 79% damage reduction. And when's it not active, you're down to 19% damage reduction against all the bleedthrough damage.

 

And the Reactor? It modifies the Bomber's already weak base shields, lessening the value of a Large or Regen Reactor (tough Turbo retains its usefulness, especially combined with Directional).

 

Anyway, getting back to the Gunship ... let's say you had a Rycer or Starguard. If someone asked you: Would you like to sacrifice a 6% mobility and 5% Evasion in order to trade in both your Primary Weapons for BLC's and a Slug Railgun, wouldn't you do it? I would.

[Kalphitis]

GS does not have Heavy Lasers (Both SF do). GS does not have retro thrusters (Type 1 SF does).

 

Keep in mind that you can't fire the slug railgun and lock on a missile at the same time. The SF, on the other hand, can lock on missiles while unloading holy HLC destruction.

 

I do believe this new GS will get torched every time if it tries to go 1v1 against a SF.

 

The new GS appears to be a mix of both close range (EMP missile/BLC) and long range (railgun). I feel like it's going to be a jack of all trades/master of nothing type of ship.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Kalphitis

[Kuciwalker]

Yes I'm going to pipe in that for a ship with low maneuverability there's a solid argument for HL over BLC.

[QuinMantha]

I still suspect Strikes will have the advantage in maneuverability. That is all.

[TrinityLyre]

I'll agree that this gunship does seem like it has a magical array of components, but I feel like people are dismissing Interdiction Missile way too rapidly. Have you seen what it does? That's crippling, assuming it lands. Nem makes a good point that this gunship counters seismic/interdiction builds rather well - it has a ridiculous amount of raw offensive power. Providing Interdiction Missile to this gunship basically just turns the bomber into a completely free kill. It can't move. It can't turn. All it (or any ship hit by it) can do is receive lovely armor-penetrating Burst Laser Cannon action. In its grill. Repeatedly. Mmm.

 

The only thing this ship needs now is Rotational Thrusters with a missile break. I'd be terrified.

 

On the subject of strikes (which are my favorite ships to play), I feel like they've been obsolete for a good while now. Can you play one and do well? Sure. Can you probably do better with another ship? I think so. TDM is typically dominated by gunship armadas, and Ion Railgun stops any strike dead in the water. An intelligent scout will stay very close to a strike, preventing it from scoring regular hits with its typically longer-ranged (and poor tracking) weaponry.

 

On Domination maps, strikes are well suited to clearing minefields at range, but have weak short-range weaponry for actually clearing nodes. In fact, even here, gunships do better (IMO). Ion Railgun AoE clears minefields ridiculously quick and strips bomber shields, making them quick kills. Strikes aren't really needed to kill bombers because even (crybaby) Sting/Flashfires pairing with that gunship can swat down multiple shieldless Razorwires/Ramparts in no time at all with Blaster Overcharge and Concentrated Fire. To me, it's clear that strikes need something unique and interesting to keep them competitive.

 

Nem's post does highlight that Burst Laser Cannon is too good relative to other short-range lasers; why should this new gunship have it but Star Guards/Rycers shouldn't? It's essentially having its cake and eating it too (additional short-range burst damage or snare). BLC usage has become rampant - if you're flying a ship that can use BLC, you're typically using BLC (notable exceptions exist). Slapping BLCs onto practically anything makes it more formidable.

Edited May 1, 2014 by TrinityLyre

[Devrius]

If anything I get the feeling the T1 strike will be this GS3'S bane, for 2 reasons:

 

1. It has more range, equipped with HLCs and Concussion missiles the extra speed and maneuverability will make quite a difference. Think of it like dogfighting a T2 scout... That has less evasion, you can out maneuver, you can out run if need be and that does not have:

 

2. Retro-Thrusters, these are the reason I main a Starguard, add Nadia and Running Interference and the head ons will quickly turn in your favor thanks to your extra range.

 

T1 strike fighters are deadly little machines, fine tuned for mid range combat they struggle versus short range scouts because they are faster and more maneuverable this new GS is neither.

 

Of course this is all in theory, only time will tell.

[Rollory]

Nem, I don't think you fly strikes much.

 

In a strike I get most of my kills with heavy lasers. Sometimes a concussion missile is the finishing blow, but most of the damage is heavies - even when I was trying to make rapid-fire lasers work, most of the time I just wasn't close enough for them to do anything. This GS is notably weak on damage at medium range (edit: and I should add that when a strike is chasing a gunship, railguns are essentially irrelevant; the strike may get tagged a few times by luck or exceptional skill but it won't be the rails that kill it). I would never pick this over either the SG or Pike - it would be like flying a clunky scout without any of the maneuverability.

 

You could set up with burst/cluster/EMP, flying it like a strike that has to get close. Or burst/EMP/interdiction ... These are kinda scary if the GS gets the drop on the strike. A retro-thruster strike seems perfect for taking this on; approach at speed, knock down the shields, retro to break the interdiction or EMP lock, heavies for the kill. I can imagine a really good pilot boosting just the right amount when they see the opponent retro, and then let loose with burst, but I can also imagine that ending up with the GS and strike flying right past each other, at which point the strike has the advantage.

 

Honestly I'd be more confident taking on this gunship than a T2 with directionals, heavies, and readied protorps (which is how I fly the Comet when someone's coming after me, and it works pretty well). It's easier to wear this one down from a distance, or to get close so as to outmaneuver it. It's scary when it gets the drop on you. Otherwise, not really.

 

Rhodogast / Kelril, The Ebon Hawk

Edited May 1, 2014 by Rollory

[Grahame]

Is that potentially because you're used to comparing a Strike with Thrusters to a Gunship without them?

 

Have you flown a T3 Strike much? It feels pretty similar to a T1 Gunship in terms of speed and maneuverability.

 

And as for Components, the T3 Gunship has the exact same Components as the T1 Strike. So while it might not be a "perfect" mix (only the T2 Scout can claim that), none of its Minor Components are particularly wasted or contradictory, like other ship component mixes have been.

 

For example, the new T3 Bomber has a Reactor instead of Armor, which is a total waste given the Bomber's natural hull and DR (which you want to further stack with an Armor component). Adding insult to injury, the T3 Bomber can take Charged Plating ... but without an Armor component to combine with it, taking Charged Plating would be suicide, since even when it's active you're still at a mere 79% damage reduction. And when's it not active, you're down to 19% damage reduction against all the bleedthrough damage.

 

And the Reactor? It modifies the Bomber's already weak base shields, lessening the value of a Large or Regen Reactor (tough Turbo retains its usefulness, especially combined with Directional).

 

Anyway, getting back to the Gunship ... let's say you had a Rycer or Starguard. If someone asked you: Would you like to sacrifice a 6% mobility and 5% Evasion in order to trade in both your Primary Weapons for BLC's and a Slug Railgun, wouldn't you do it? I would.

 

I'm seconding Nemarus' concern on this one. I've spent the majority of my GSF time in a StarGuard and this thing looks like it would have very similar performance with the added advantage of huge range.

 

Considering it's load out, this GS threatens a huge set of ranges: ~7k-15k for slug, 1k to 5-5.5k with clusters/interdiction, and 0-3k with BLCs (I'm guesstimating actual effective ranges here). With a max pitch rate of 1.8, this has a more than fair chance in a close range fight with my 1.9 pitch rate StarGuard.

 

On the plus side, this will get me to fly a GS, I guess...

[Fractalsponge]

I don't know where that T3 gunship has been all my life, but I NEED it.

 

This, along with the stats to interdiction missile, immediately removes all my disappointment in 2.8.

[MystbladeWA]

Interdiction Missile doesnt seem all that different to Sab Probe tbh, i mean aside from the dmg element. Sab Probe is actually better imo.

[tunewalker]

Honestly I think the Interdiction missile, Railgun combo will make this a fine GUNSHIP. acting similarly to the T1 gunship with more tools to evade for longer (if i am not mistaken it gets power dive) with power dive it can dodge missiles like a T1 GS used to, turn around drop a fast interdiction missile and burst laser on some one and boost away. Turn around and Rail gun. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

 

Obviously sacrificing lightweight armor and Ion Railgun.

 

 

Edit: Also.... PLEASE GIVE INTERDICTION MISSILE ON T3 Scout and T2 Strike at least

Edited May 2, 2014 by tunewalker

[Verain]

Battle Scout Variant makes T1 and T2 Strikes obsolete!

 

 

The T3 gunship sorta looks overtuned. I don't think the issue is to point to a generally weak set of ships and point out how it's better than them. I think like three people on the forum are on record as thinking strike fighters are fine, and I'm not in that camp at all.

 

Strikes are exactly 6.89% faster and 5.33% more maneuverable. I'd hardly call that "way".

 

The strike pitches 5.33% faster, yaws 6.7% faster, goes 6.9% faster. It is important. Should we actually be asking for these numbers to go up a bit for the strike?

[tunewalker]

Battle Scout Variant makes T1 and T2 Strikes obsolete!

 

 

The T3 gunship sorta looks overtuned. I don't think the issue is to point to a generally weak set of ships and point out how it's better than them. I think like three people on the forum are on record as thinking strike fighters are fine, and I'm not in that camp at all.

 

 

 

The strike pitches 5.33% faster, yaws 6.7% faster, goes 6.9% faster. It is important. Should we actually be asking for these numbers to go up a bit for the strike?

 

actually definitely no, If it went up to much it would have equal maneuver to a scout. That would not be good. if anything it might need energy efficiency like a scout, but I wouldnt want its actual speed or maneuver to go up, I personally feel both of those are in line with the progression form, scout down to bomber, but thats me personally.

[Verain]

actually definitely no, If it went up to much it would have equal maneuver to a scout.

 

Scout is like 20% more maneuverable and 12% faster something right? I think that there's room to buff the strike without it becoming a scout- but since strikes are almost always out of breath, I agree with you on the efficiency.

 

Strikes and gunships use 10.4 I think, and scouts 8.7.

[Zoom_VI]

Scout is like 20% more maneuverable and 12% faster something right? I think that there's room to buff the strike without it becoming a scout- but since strikes are almost always out of breath, I agree with you on the efficiency.

 

Strikes and gunships use 10.4 I think, and scouts 8.7.

not sure but if I recall correctly a strike with speed thrusters outstrips a baseline scout by a fair margin so they are not that far apart.

[tunewalker]

Scout is like 20% more maneuverable and 12% faster something right? I think that there's room to buff the strike without it becoming a scout- but since strikes are almost always out of breath, I agree with you on the efficiency.

 

Strikes and gunships use 10.4 I think, and scouts 8.7.

 

Base line no Scouts are only 5ish% faster (780 vs 744 a difference of 36/s which is around 5% from 744 to 780) Maneuvering its about 1.8 vs 1.6 so only about 15% more maneuverable so close. The big difference is that energy.

 

 

Scouts Afterburner Cost 4, 8.7/s

 

Everything else. 5, 10.4 per second. (honestly I feel the scouts might be the ones out of line here, every one else is around the same difference in speed and maneuver from one tier to the next, scouts just get that little even MORE of an edge in addition to that speed and maneuver, but hey its what it is.)

 

Everything else is the same accross every ship bassically (oh except should be noted, Bombers have less weapon energy passively then any other ship, seems odd to me.