Removing the missile break on DF

[tunewalker]

something else about lockdown it can help when trying to flee or chase as well since. the loss in energy makes the slower strike a bit better off. Its a bit niche but ya its definately doable. All in all good write up. Edited May 13, 2014 by tunewalker

[CateranEnforcer]

Are you using Yuun?

 

Indeed.

[tunewalker]

Indeed.

 

That is likely why 13% efficiency will do that, if the person wanted to run C2 then they would not want to use frequency and quads.

[CateranEnforcer]

That is likely why 13% efficiency will do that, if the person wanted to run C2 then they would not want to use frequency and quads.

 

True, though I think after the 13% efficiency, 10 more power isn't a huge deal. Still it's possible. None of the builds talked about here I would consider bad, you just play to the strengths of your build.

 

Now to stay kind of on topic, I'm not sure about removing the missile break. I could honestly go either way. I do think that the missile break is the only viable T3 option for DField. Ironically, when it was 70% evasion, the two T3 upgrades shared a rough equality. More options is always good. Personally, I don't find the missile break to be that huge of a thing to play around, so I think find a way to improve the other shields may be the way to go and I don't think it would create any power creep.

[tunewalker]

True, though I think after the 13% efficiency, 10 more power isn't a huge deal. Still it's possible. None of the builds talked about here I would consider bad, you just play to the strengths of your build.

 

Now to stay kind of on topic, I'm not sure about removing the missile break. I could honestly go either way. I do think that the missile break is the only viable T3 option for DField. Ironically, when it was 70% evasion, the two T3 upgrades shared a rough equality. More options is always good. Personally, I don't find the missile break to be that huge of a thing to play around, so I think find a way to improve the other shields may be the way to go and I don't think it would create any power creep.

 

I worry about the power creep honestly. i would rather just nerf 1 rather then buff 6. You also have to remember in those days the engine maneuvers were also on a 10 second CD. With them increased and the duration already increased on DF from those days it has made the missile break stronger. And lets face in those days missiles were just as hard even if they went with the only 1 missile break because of the short CD on engine maneuvers but to top it off DF was still OP because you could essentially be immune to anything for 3 seconds or immune to blaster fire and rail guns for 6 while easily dodgeing missiles with your engine maneuver.

[mr_sim]

 

Protons: In a multi-way tie for, "galaxy's worst anti-scout missile." If you're going after less skilled scouts, use concussion missiles. Concussion missiles have nice upgrade options and they hurt a lot. If you're going after the real aces, use cluster missiles with double volley because that's the only way you have any hope of getting decent missile damage on them. Spam them like they're going out of style. You'll run dry on missiles doing this, but the dps is needed if you want to burn down a good scout before it gets away or bursts you down.

 

 

Third best actually IMO against Scout.

 

Cluster

Concussion

Proton

 

then you have for left overs. Ion, EMP, Thermite so all in all protons are actually in the top 50%. Protons actually kil scouts nice if you know what your doing with them. I use Cluster + Proton Load, and lets say I never run out of Cluster even with 2xtick. I alternate between both missiles enough to not run out on clusters. But anytime scouts quit attacking me and go after someone else I chase them down with protons.

[tunewalker]

Third best actually IMO against Scout.

 

Cluster

Concussion

Proton

 

then you have for left overs. Ion, EMP, Thermite so all in all protons are actually in the top 50%. Protons actually kil scouts nice if you know what your doing with them. I use Cluster + Proton Load, and lets say I never run out of Cluster even with 2xtick. I alternate between both missiles enough to not run out on clusters. But anytime scouts quit attacking me and go after someone else I chase them down with protons.

 

You are using a pike/ quell. This is a Stargaurd/ rycer build.... Pay attention. It only has 1 missile on it. And with one missile option Protons are the easiest to dodge ( I showed everyone the math on this already). Thus they are in a tie with all of those other choices because the ability to land them with out having the option of a missile swap is horendous.

[Ramalina]

That is likely why 13% efficiency will do that, if the person wanted to run C2 then they would not want to use frequency and quads.

 

Having seen Aloriana fly plenty of times I'd say piloting is perhaps more important than Yuun. You can actually do quite well with power expenditure that greatly exceeds power regeneration if you organize it so that you're doing brief bursts that are used at full efficiency.

 

If most of your shots hit, you can do a lot with 100 blaster power. Then you go do other things for a little while so it can regen, for the next episode of firing. For example, shaking pursuers, regen of resources, and positioning for the next attack.

 

I'd have to check to be sure, but I think on my Pike I run quads, frequency, and C2. It works fine, because it's such a pure hit and run build that I almost never spend more time on target than it takes to deplete the blaster pool. Wouldn't want to try it on my turning thrusters Starguard build though.

[tunewalker]

Having seen Aloriana fly plenty of times I'd say piloting is perhaps more important than Yuun. You can actually do quite well with power expenditure that greatly exceeds power regeneration if you organize it so that you're doing brief bursts that are used at full efficiency.

 

If most of your shots hit, you can do a lot with 100 blaster power. Then you go do other things for a little while so it can regen, for the next episode of firing. For example, shaking pursuers, regen of resources, and positioning for the next attack.

 

I'd have to check to be sure, but I think on my Pike I run quads, frequency, and C2. It works fine, because it's such a pure hit and run build that I almost never spend more time on target than it takes to deplete the blaster pool. Wouldn't want to try it on my turning thrusters Starguard build though.

 

 

Well again this is almost an obviously, but with that I find it would be rare to take some one form full to dead in a single pool of energy.

 

That all comes down to how you fly, but it is generally more difficult for a good majority of the player base to fire quads with frequency and no Yuun. While it works for some I wont recommend it simply because its hard to make work right, and you have to have the proper mentality for it to work.

[Devrius]

... I managed to derail my own thread, somehow it turned into a T1 workshop!

 

Not that I mind, it's good advice and the many suggestions brought a build to mind (Quick shields are not doing it for me, that build is getting scrapped).

 

Anyway back to topic, I believe DF needs to lose the Missile break if for no reason that it currently makes any other shield option obsolete but I can't think of a good compensation for the GS that needs it badly.

 

Maybe give the missile break to the Fortress Shield? You trade mobility for stronger shields and are immune to missile locks (but a sitting duck), you can use it as on the run missile break and not stand still just to break the lock or stand your ground and see whose guns melt who first.

 

Just an idea.

[mr_sim]

You are using a pike/ quell. This is a Stargaurd/ rycer build.... Pay attention. It only has 1 missile on it. And with one missile option Protons are the easiest to dodge ( I showed everyone the math on this already). Thus they are in a tie with all of those other choices because the ability to land them with out having the option of a missile swap is horendous.

 

Point, what happens when I leave discussion and come back later. Though the comment was something like "worst Scout killer ever". Were the words I responded to.

[Ramalina]

Third best actually IMO against Scout.

 

Cluster

Concussion

Proton

 

then you have for left overs. Ion, EMP, Thermite so all in all protons are actually in the top 50%. Protons actually kil scouts nice if you know what your doing with them. I use Cluster + Proton Load, and lets say I never run out of Cluster even with 2xtick. I alternate between both missiles enough to not run out on clusters. But anytime scouts quit attacking me and go after someone else I chase them down with protons.

 

Well, I'd consider them tied with asteroids. Deadly when hit, but it requires the pilot on the crashing ship to actually fly into the obstacle. It's not a matter of being a good weapon against scouts, it's a matter of some scouts being operated by people who regularly fly into easily avoidable obstacles.

 

I destroy scouts with proton torpedoes pretty often and it is rather fun, but I'm fully aware that the kills are not coming from excellent piloting on my part or the great qualities of the proton torpedo as a weapon. The kills are coming from the poor buggers I'm hitting not having any clue what they're doing. If they had a clue, I wouldn't be hitting them; at least not with proton torpedoes.

 

All of the above is for scouts mind you. Targeting other ship classes you can sometimes force a proton torpedo hit even if the target is aware of what's happening and uncooperative. Most of the time it means they made a mistake shortly before, but on rare occasions, more on the Denon map than anywhere else, you can find people too far from LOS obstacles even if they haven't made a serious positioning error.

 

Edit:

Even when I do sneaky evil crap like hold past lock to bait early defensive cooldowns, start locks after they burned a defensive CD against someone else, boost in to 2 km or less before launch, or use retros to recycle time and range on approach a scout that's aware of what's going on never needs to take a proton hit unless they choose not to go evasive. Protons and thermites take so long to lock that you don't need a missile break to deal with them, clever flying is more than sufficient.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Ramalina

[tunewalker]

Point, what happens when I leave discussion and come back later. Though the comment was something like "worst Scout killer ever". Were the words I responded to.

 

In terms of being used on a ship with a single missile, which in that terms its correct.

[mr_sim]

In terms of being used on a ship with a single missile, which in that terms its correct.

 

You know if your going to be like that. Let me remind that this thread is supposed to be about DF which no Strike actually has.

[CateranEnforcer]

I think the Yuun/ C2-N2 is also a bit of a stylistic comparison. I think I prefer Yuun for my strike simply because I like taking unlikely fringe shots and have become more careful involving engine power. I like them both, and I use C2-N2 for scout builds for sure.

[tunewalker]

You know if your going to be like that. Let me remind that this thread is supposed to be about DF which no Strike actually has.

 

This is correct, that stuff was an off shoot and derail of the main thread and had little to do with the topic at hand.

 

I would also like to remind you that other ships beyond strikes have protons.... Comet breakers which generally only have 1 missile. And Bombers again of which only have 1 missile. These rarely land on scouts thanks to 2 missile breaks. AkA this isnt just a "strike Problem" this affects all ships that are not Nova Dives Flash Fires and Quarrells, the 3 current big boys on campus as they both have the ability to shut down every one elses burst while still being able to dish theirs out since it doesnt require long missile locks.

[DamascusAdontise]

IMO

 

If you want to talk about removing missile break from DF then the answer is: Flatly No

 

If however the discussion is re-balancing an overpowered defensive ability, then the answer is: *pulls up a chair* get some popcorn and soda because its going to be a long talk Virginia.......

 

Whether it is right or wrong, evasion on a main component ability is considered a secondary benefit (IMO): I say this due to the way secondary effects are implemented on targeting telemetry (primary damage buff / secondary evasion kicker) and DF (Missile break with +evasion granted for duration) - this coupled with crew abilities which provide secondary type bonus (which include abilities that grant small amounts of evasion for personal or AOE) lead me to believe that evasion is a secondary type benefit.

 

This being true then DF is a missile break with evasion. I think we can talk about reducing the secondary evasion bonus it provides, increasing the cool-down, or re-balancing it in other ways I don't currently see.

 

Asking for the missile break to be removed is tantamount to asking for DF to be removed or re-classified as a active evasion ability (in which case its evasion properties would have to be drastically increased - like back to what it was before the nerf)

 

If this is the case you have more to worry about than a 2nd missile break. Be careful about asking for dramatic change, removing the MB seriously strips this ability, and its replacement is likely more evasion which opens a new can of worms. Would you rather let the scout blow his cooldowns and then land the missile after or give them some other benefit that we don't know how to deal with yet.

[tommmsunb]

IMO

 

If you want to talk about removing missile break from DF then the answer is: Flatly No

 

If however the discussion is re-balancing an overpowered defensive ability, then the answer is: *pulls up a chair* get some popcorn and soda because its going to be a long talk Virginia.......

 

Whether it is right or wrong, evasion on a main component ability is considered a secondary benefit (IMO): I say this due to the way secondary effects are implemented on targeting telemetry (primary damage buff / secondary evasion kicker) and DF (Missile break with +evasion granted for duration) - this coupled with crew abilities which provide secondary type bonus (which include abilities that grant small amounts of evasion for personal or AOE) lead me to believe that evasion is a secondary type benefit.

 

This being true then DF is a missile break with evasion. I think we can talk about reducing the secondary evasion bonus it provides, increasing the cool-down, or re-balancing it in other ways I don't currently see.

 

Asking for the missile break to be removed is tantamount to asking for DF to be removed or re-classified as a active evasion ability (in which case its evasion properties would have to be drastically increased - like back to what it was before the nerf)

 

If this is the case you have more to worry about than a 2nd missile break. Be careful about asking for dramatic change, removing the MB seriously strips this ability, and its replacement is likely more evasion which opens a new can of worms. Would you rather let the scout blow his cooldowns and then land the missile after or give them some other benefit that we don't know how to deal with yet.

 

I honestly wouldn't object to removing its evasion and turning it into a pure missile break. That is if a nerf is really this necessary.

Edited May 13, 2014 by tommmsunb

[tunewalker]

IMO

 

If you want to talk about removing missile break from DF then the answer is: Flatly No

 

If however the discussion is re-balancing an overpowered defensive ability, then the answer is: *pulls up a chair* get some popcorn and soda because its going to be a long talk Virginia.......

 

Whether it is right or wrong, evasion on a main component ability is considered a secondary benefit (IMO): I say this due to the way secondary effects are implemented on targeting telemetry (primary damage buff / secondary evasion kicker) and DF (Missile break with +evasion granted for duration) - this coupled with crew abilities which provide secondary type bonus (which include abilities that grant small amounts of evasion for personal or AOE) lead me to believe that evasion is a secondary type benefit.

 

This being true then DF is a missile break with evasion. I think we can talk about reducing the secondary evasion bonus it provides, increasing the cool-down, or re-balancing it in other ways I don't currently see.

 

Asking for the missile break to be removed is tantamount to asking for DF to be removed or re-classified as a active evasion ability (in which case its evasion properties would have to be drastically increased - like back to what it was before the nerf)

 

If this is the case you have more to worry about than a 2nd missile break. Be careful about asking for dramatic change, removing the MB seriously strips this ability, and its replacement is likely more evasion which opens a new can of worms. Would you rather let the scout blow his cooldowns and then land the missile after or give them some other benefit that we don't know how to deal with yet.

 

 

It is currently classified as an evasion buff first a missile break second. You have to spend 13k points to make it a missile break and can actually opt not to take the missile break. Clearly showings its primary Role is NOT meant to be a missile break. Meaning if every one thinks its primary role IS a missile break first evasion second then every one is using it in a manner not intended. If its OP because people are using it majoritily as a means not intended then its like Interdiction, its intended role must be restored by removing the role it wasnt supposed to fill.

 

 

Also recall my suggestion for it to bring it in balance with other shield options. The final teir instead of being Missile break or 3 second increase in duration would be 3 second increase duration or 10-15% increased evasion. Bringing it in line with all other shields. (quick charge being either reduced CD or some regen while combat, Directional being either effectively a turbo reactor or a regen reactor so on and so forth, making the on use either stronger or last longer is in line with other things we have seen and is much more balanced choice then current missile break.)

Edited May 13, 2014 by tunewalker

[Ramalina]

It is currently classified as an evasion buff first a missile break second. You have to spend 13k points to make it a missile break and can actually opt not to take the missile break. Clearly showings its primary Role is NOT meant to be a missile break. Meaning if every one thinks its primary role IS a missile break first evasion second then every one is using it in a manner not intended. If its OP because people are using it majoritily as a means not intended then its like Interdiction, its intended role must be restored by removing the role it wasnt supposed to fill.

 

 

Also recall my suggestion for it to bring it in balance with other shield options. The final teir instead of being Missile break or 3 second increase in duration would be 3 second increase duration or 10-15% increased evasion. Bringing it in line with all other shields. (quick charge being either reduced CD or some regen while combat, Directional being either effectively a turbo reactor or a regen reactor so on and so forth, making the on use either stronger or last longer is in line with other things we have seen and is much more balanced choice then current missile break.)

 

Very good points. The real problem with changing it at this point is that gunships are too reliant on DF for survival so if you give a modest nerf to scouts by taking away the missile break you smash gunships with a sledgehammer.

 

I don't really see this happening. Doesn't mean they couldn't try exotic changes, say changing the effect from a missile break to 20-40% damage reduction for the duration (or whatever math modeling indicates is appropriate), but it seems unlikely.

 

It's hard to deal with DF being slightly too good on type 2 scouts when for gunships the options other than DF aren't good enough. They're working on gunship shield options, but they're going slowly and cautiously.

[Anishor]

I honestly wouldn't object to removing its evasion and turning it into a pure missile break. That is if a nerf is really this necessary.

 

Better design would be to make that the final tier options, evasion or missile break. At least in my humble opinion or add another ability that is a missile break by itself and remove the break from DF. So in the end you chose evasion or break.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Anishor

[Verain]

I think you guys are pretty wildly into nerf territory now. The distortion field needs to remain a good shield- after all, it's the only shield component worth taking for the type 1 gunship, and it's very popular right now on every ship that can use it.

 

 

I do like that there's the general assessment that scouts- with the possible exception of the type 3 scout- don't really need more help immuning missiles. I don't think something simple like a mild barrel roll buff (and barrel roll can't be buffed in a vacuum) would be enough. I think you'd need to change a few other things to shift the meta.

 

 

Right now, I'd say that scouts are largely immune to missiles even while popping cooldowns. When your 1 button and your 4 button combine to increase your damage by nearly double and your 2 button cancels all missile locks and missiles in flight and you maintain your 3 button to either attack a new opponent with another wave of missile invincibility+evasion or escape the kill zone after popping your target, AND you have the maneuverability and speed to simply leave should it not be ideal or should you want your cooldowns back, then you have a situation where the ship simply is so hard to peel. Trying to grab a battle scout off of a friend is super hard as a strike, and a dice rolling game as a gunship.

[Altheran]

In my opinion, pointing the missile-lock break on Distrotion Field as potentially OP is a fair concern.

I will not yell "OMG ! OP !!1!" as I did not consider it too strong before, but this thread made me think harder about it and now I see an inequality when this upgrade is taken.

 

Let me explain how I reached the conclusion that something's wrong :

 

If we look at all shields components, they're all passively giving something in one hand, and taking away something in the other hand, or doing nothing passively (before upgrades).

 

- Quick-chage gives regen and engine efficiency, at the cost of shield strength.

- Overcharged Shields, give shield strength at the cost of regen.

- Shield Projector give regen and "recently used" regen at the cost of shield strength.

- Charged Plating gives shield strength at the cost of bleedthrough

- Feedback Shield modifes nothing

- Directional Shields modify nothing

- Fortress Shield will modify nothing.

- Repair Drone modifies nothing.

 

Remains Distortion Field. One will say it gives Evasion at the cost of Shield Strength... But it's more complicated than that.

 

Other shields that modify stats are actually modifying how the shields react towards frontloaded damage. Those with bigger pool are good against big chunck of damage, while those with a weakened pool will perform badly.

On the contrary, regenerative shields (weaker pool) will easily wipe off small amounts of damage damage, while on the other hand the other ones will exaust themselves in a way or another on a long run.

 

But Distortion Field isn't like that. Both the bonus and the malus affect frontload survivability. What changes now is how they react towards weapon types : aimed ones vs automated ones.

Distortion Field is passively strengthening the survivability against the aimed ones. The evasion percentage may be lower, but it's now known that it saves shields as well as hull. So it's beneficial in that area.

However against automated weapons (assuming they hit shields), it became weaker as the shields have been weakened without counterpart.

In the end Distortion field can be described as :

 

- Distortion Field gives surviability against aimed weapon at the cost of being more sensitive to automated ones.

 

And that's where the missile-lock breaker may be too strong :

- on neither of other shields, upgrade never negate their inherent weakness (exception of Charged Plating which mildly moderates it with T1).

- can also be said of those shields that neither of the T3 upgrades are something like a game changer (maybe beside Turbo T3 of directional which should probably tuned down to not be almost as strong as a fully upgraded Reactor, but more like the regen-T3)

But the lock breaker on Distortion Field does both. It is a game changer from people's mouth (see "GS without it are dead GS"). And it almost completely negates the weakness that DF has itself built towards automated weapons by unallowing the landing of almost all missiles that would have gone through Engine abilities.

 

So considering this, I think this particular upgrade should be looked at carefully by the devs, and that they should decide whether shields should overcome their own weaknesses (and maybe adapt shields that don't) or not (and adapt DF).

Edited May 13, 2014 by Altheran

[DamascusAdontise]

I also have re-evaluated my position after thinking about this. DF could lose the missile break, so long as they substantially upgrade it as a defensive ability, which likely means more evasion. So long as it is still a good defensive ability I have no issues. Removing the missile break and leaving it like that would gut the ability.

 

Another possibility is that (like someone else suggested in another post) DF could stay largely the same and be double blind, meaning that while people cannot hit you with lasers or missiles, you also cannot fire out of the bubble for the duration. This would keep it from being used as an offensive ability.

 

If the above was done I would suggest having a missile lockout for the duration, in addition to the missile break.

 

My worry here is that scouts losing the second missile break will be dead meat (after using missile break). Without the second missile break, we would likely spend twice as much time LOS'ing around objects to break missile locks (which is rather boring if you ask me) and also catch 2x the missiles (which with our armor means a lot of deaths)

 

I understand something needs to be done, and there are many options to pick and pull from. I just urge caution, scout are OP at the moment but pull the right twig out of the dam and kersploosh!

 

SO as to be clear I am saying:

 

Im fine leaving it as it (I don't think its "that" necessary for wide sweeping nerfs to DF, but if it must happen then...)

 

Im fine with them tweaking evasion down (or removing it)

 

Im fine with them removing missile break (assuming it gets an appropriate defensive buff)

 

I am fine with leaving it as is and adding a double blind debuff, and a missile lockout for the duration

 

(I am not fine with a mix of the above, these are all stand alone solutions)

[Applejacxs]

Any one else think that's why there changing fortress shield the way they are in pts? Cause they are planing to look at DF? It would certainly seem they want gs to have some option if they do modify DF

 

edit:

lol I am late to the party it seems XD

Edited May 15, 2014 by Applejacxs