Ion Railgun change, EMP change

[Verain]

Interdiction mines are 50 or 60 percent depending on talents. But they also dork your turning.

 

I'm personally glad to see a snare based utility being added alongside an energy denial rebalance. The current drain plus 0 regen is very strong, and I tends to leave strikes in particular unable to even use their escape maneuver.

[Ramalina]

Well, I think it's intended that the debuff be very powerful- ion railgun is really only about the debuff. I agree that the slow sounds powerful- but I think that it is supposed to be?

 

 

We don't really have dev statements on the intention of the weapon, but I don't think the intention has ever been "it's ok to get hit with ion railgun".

 

So can we get the damage on a proton torpedo upped to say, 1700? Because there's no excuse for ever getting hit with a p-torp, and there's no more reason for it to be "ok to get hit with a proton torpedo" than for it to be "ok to get hit with an ion railgun."

 

The proper answer is, "of course not, don't be silly." Railguns were justifiably nerfed because they offered overly powerful movement impairing effects, and now they're planning on adding overly powerful movement impairing effects back. Not as bad as it was I suppose, because gunships and scouts have some halfway decent tools to deal with it, and bombers are painfully slow no matter what, but compensate by being impressive damage sponges. I suppose CC that really screws with one ship class is better than CC that really screws with all ship classes, but as a strike fan I'm really not thrilled by the prospect of this.

 

Going from a extreme hazard that's countered with a strategy that has an expensive tradeoff (keeping a full engine pool for just in case scenarios) to an extreme hazard where the counter is stay out of range of all gunships at all times isn't a gameplay improvement in my view. The regen debuff you can deal with if you accept a stiff penalty in tradeoff, going from that to not even having an opportunity for a tradeoff kinda sucks.

 

In case you can't tell, I'd don't experience problems with the regen debuff at present, but I'm one of the few people willing to keep an energy pool at 80% or so in the presence of gunships if I'm doing something other than actively engaging them.

 

My suspicion is that this is going to create a situation where getting more than 3 - 4 km from cover is unacceptably risky for strikes.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Ramalina

[Pilgrim_Grey]

My suspicion is that this is going to create a situation where getting more than 3 - 4 km from cover is unacceptably risky for strikes.

 

I don't know if it'll go quite that far, but... yeah. My fear is that this is going to put ion railguns back in their pre-2.7 spot of being really overpowered (and they still are a bit strong for energy drain). I just would like to see baby steps with this, particularly since Bioware's MO with changes is only major updates. I don't feel like waiting between 2.8 and 2.9 Or 2.10 or whatever we get after) while gunships have too much debuff. Again.

[Gerfaut]

My main concern is that this will bring back ion spamming. Currently, most gunship pilots spec into the regen debuff, which synergizes with the energy drain, and the drain scales with charge. This creates an incentive to use fully charged ion railshots. If you hit someone with a minimum charge shot (25%), the energy drain is small and the additional regen debuff is not nearly as crippling as on a ship that takes a full ion shot. Secondary targets that get hit by the AOE get even less power drained and the 6 sec of no regen is not too much of a concern for them because they usually have plenty of power left, which lets them survive until they can regen again.

 

The 12-sec slow on the other hand is just as deadly on a ship with full power as on a ship with low power, so there will be very little incentive to use full-charge ion shots. Just the opposite in fact. A gunship can usually get off 2 full-charge shots back to back before running low on weapon's power. But the same gunship could get off 8 or more 25% charge shots on a full power bar (probably closer to 10). This means that a single gunship could potentially snare every single ship on the opposing team before running out of power. Realistically, not every shot will hit its mark, but some shots will hit multiple ships. Now, imagine a team with 4 gunships, each of which can fire a partial-charge AOE ion railshot every 1.75 seconds...

 

There is another issue with the slow: it is just as crippling to the secondary targets caught in the AOE as it is to the primary target, unlike the regen debuff, which is most deadly to the primary target that got a significant portion of its energy drained by the shot.

 

Also, secondary targets get hit just from being within the radius of the AOE, regardless of any defenses they may have (such as passive evasion) or any defensive CDs they might be using (such as Distorsion Field). So, if I want to slow a scout, I don't have to worry about evasion, I can just hit the strike flying nearby and the scout will be slowed by the AOE. In fact, if the strike is 14.9k away and the scout is 16k away, I will still slow the scout if he is within the radius of the AOE, even though he is out of range of my railgun and probably thinks he's safe. This is currently the case with ion debuffs on live, but it is not as much of an issue because, as I mentioned, the debuffs are not as deadly to secondary targets as a 12-sec 55% slow would be.

 

For these reasons, I think that a 12-second 55% AOE slow is too powerful, unless the duration of the slow scales with charge, which is not currently the case. Also, secondary targets should only get half the duration of the slow.

[WiseStranger]

AoE damage is AoE damage. Debuff is applied only to the primary target. Don't make an elephant out of a fly.

The only reason why AoE damage drains engine and weapon power from secondary targets is because it specifically says so in T4 talent.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

AoE damage is AoE damage. Debuff is applied only to the primary target. Don't make an elephant out of a fly.

The only reason why AoE damage drains engine and weapon power from secondary targets is because it specifically says so in T4 talent.

 

While true I think there is some merit in his/her observation that while the regen debuff needs to be fired at full charge to really impact an enemy the slow will hit hard whether it's 25% charge or full.

 

Now granted a slow with a full charge drain will be worse than a spam shot the potential for the ability to be so good that it may encourage spamming should be considered. There are tactical situations where spamming shots might be more advantageous than full charge shots, for example applying a slow to a bunch of strikers so scouts can pick them off or slowing a bunch of enemies so they're less able to flee from a minelayer (useful if you wanted to wipe out a group of enemies in a domination match), or slowing attackers so a GS has enough time to flee and/or pick them off (I'm not saying that such a use isn't bad as a last ditch effort but 12 seconds seems like it would be so long that it would completely shut down a striker's ability to pursue without using BR and even then it might be iffy).

[Kuciwalker]

There is another issue with the slow: it is just as crippling to the secondary targets caught in the AOE as it is to the primary target, unlike the regen debuff, which is most deadly to the primary target that got a significant portion of its energy drained by the shot.

 

Dude. The debuff from ion has never affected the AOE targets. The only effect on AOE targets is the shield damage (and minimal hull damage) and the 18point energy drain.

[Gerfaut]

Dude. The debuff from ion has never affected the AOE targets. The only effect on AOE targets is the shield damage (and minimal hull damage) and the 18point energy drain.

 

Sorry, I did not know that. This is good news. For some reason, my target window does not show buffs/debuffs on enemy ships, even when I apply the debuff myself. When I hit a bunch of ships with ion railgun AOE, a blue glow appears on each ship for a few seconds and I thought the glow represented the debuff. I guess it's just showing me which ships I hit (but I already know that from the numbers appearing on top of them).

 

Anyway, my first point still stands: this is likely to encourage ion spamming because the duration of the slow is not affected by charge. Thus, there is not much incentive to use full charge when specced for the slow, as opposed to the regen debuff. A single gunship will be able to CC multiple targets in fairly quick succession for very little energy cost by targetting them one at a time with a 25%-charge ion shot and letting the other ships on their team finish them off.

[WiseStranger]

While true I think there is some merit in his/her observation that while the regen debuff needs to be fired at full charge to really impact an enemy the slow will hit hard whether it's 25% charge or full.

 

Now granted a slow with a full charge drain will be worse than a spam shot the potential for the ability to be so good that it may encourage spamming should be considered. There are tactical situations where spamming shots might be more advantageous than full charge shots, for example applying a slow to a bunch of strikers so scouts can pick them off or slowing a bunch of enemies so they're less able to flee from a minelayer (useful if you wanted to wipe out a group of enemies in a domination match), or slowing attackers so a GS has enough time to flee and/or pick them off (I'm not saying that such a use isn't bad as a last ditch effort but 12 seconds seems like it would be so long that it would completely shut down a striker's ability to pursue without using BR and even then it might be iffy).

 

Considering that many ships require 2 fully charged shots from a Slug to be killed, there is little incentive to use Ion if it doesn't provide something more than just wiping shields. And as it stands right now, a gunship even when geared for running away is a free kill to an equally skilled pilot in a strike/scout. Every scout/strike with build focused on survival will survive for a long time and possibly indefinitely against another ship. I don't think complaining about something that is practically the only way of survival left to a gunship is reasonable.

 

That still leaves a big question about type 2 gunship as anyone piloting it might as well BR into an asteroid after any strike/scout spots it.

 

Also, quick taps were useful before as the main reason was to drain targets engine and power pool. I don't care if I'm slowed for as long as my turning rate is not debuffed and I have enough engine power to boost away. 25% charge won't even bother anyone's engines. Even 6 second -100% regen debuff by itself is not scary. And when you have a battle 2 vs 1 and you're trying to kill them instead of running away, I don't think you can blame anyone for being blasted to bits.

[Zharik]

Actually, it's, 1.0 normal speed for 6 seconds IFF(if and only if) you were foolish and didn't keep a relatively full engine pool while a gunship was in range. If you do keep a healthy cushion in your engine pool, then it's not a problem because you have enough energy to boost even without regen. In other words, there's a flying strategy that is a reasonable counter to the ion rail's drain and debuff.

 

I don't currently see a strategy that would offer similar ability to respond to the proposed slow, at least not for strikes. Aside from making your absolute first priority when flying to never be at ranges of 5-15km from a hostile type 1 gunship without a really big LOS obstacle to shield you. It changes your position from, "you can afford to get hit once by an ion railgun if you fly carefully to account for that hazard," to, " if you get hit by an ion railgun you're as good as dead, and there's nothing you can do about it." Outside of strikes, it might not be all that bad, as there are components that are not so unreasonably bad that no one ever takes them that can potentially either prevent the ion shot from hitting in the first place or increase survivability enough so that you might actually make it to cover despite the series of slug shots that should follow the ion shot.

 

Ion railguns went from excessive CC power to strong CC power in the last patch, looks like they're reversing that now. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.

 

I always shoot them twice with Ion. Who wouldn't? (even if they get to me they have zero weapon power)

[Kuciwalker]

I always shoot them twice with Ion. Who wouldn't? (even if they get to me they have zero weapon power)

 

Ion's energy drain (NOT the debuff, just the drain) now scales with charge, so two snap shots no longer drain most/all power.

[Zharik]

Ion's energy drain (NOT the debuff, just the drain) now scales with charge, so two snap shots no longer drain most/all power.

 

Could you please show me where I said I used snap shots?

[Kuciwalker]

Could you please show me where I said I used snap shots?

 

If you are landing two full-charge shots you're better off if the second is a slug. The most powerful CC is dead.

[Zharik]

If you are landing two full-charge shots you're better off if the second is a slug. The most powerful CC is dead.

 

It's also AOE (with some CC on those as well)... Thanks but I'll continue to play how I am successful and I enjoy myself.