Ask me anything / Training

[MaximilianPower]

Listen up junior I am an ace and I am better with the t2 gunship than you are with any ship

 

No idea why I'm wading into this. Bored, I guess.

 

I've played with and against you in a T2 GS. You are probably the best I've ever seen in that ship. I can think of one other guy who used to fly a lot of T2 on JC who was also pretty damn good in that thing. Calling yourself a "T2 Gunship ace" in your sig seems fine to me.

 

However, I'm with Despon/Drak and the others on this: it's great that you're good in a T2, but you'd be even more effective in either of the other gunships. Playstyle is a bit different, sure, but they are both simply so much more flexible given the better range of component options. Ion rail is the best weapon in the game. T3 can handle close-quarters combat better than any other GS. Your defense of the T2 is admirable, but I can't ever see it proving to be more impactful in a serious game than either of the other options.

 

Obviously, the strengths of these ships will only really shine in a real match, against top opponents. There, the T1 or T3 will simply be better options, in all scenarios I've ever been involved in. Against lesser opposition, it doesn't matter.

 

Maybe - in the name of science - give one of the other gunships a try and see what happens?

 

EDIT: in an attempt to draw this thread back to its intended purpose (and apologies to Drak for participating in the nonsense) - the above can be viewed as general info, applicable to new and old pilot alike. So, if you're new, the takeaway is that while you can probably do OK in a T2 GS, you'll do better in a T1 or T3. Try one of those before dumping req into a T2. Once you've got the other gunship's under control, sure, give the T2 a spin. You can be effective in them (as Krix has indicated) but they aren't great beginner ships, to say the least.

Edited January 8, 2016 by MaximilianPower

[Ryuku-sama]

No idea why I'm wading into this. Bored, I guess.

 

I've played with and against you in a T2 GS. You are probably the best I've ever seen in that ship. I can think of one other guy who used to fly a lot of T2 on JC who was also pretty damn good in that thing. Calling yourself a "T2 Gunship ace" in your sig seems fine to me.

 

Being likely the other "ace" using a T2 Sheep on JC...

The Comet Breaker is a piece of crap. I was using a Double Torp build and could do decently but I would have done twice as good in any other ship. I tried a rail build.. Everything it could do was done better on a Quarrel. Its only "niche" is having access to two torpedoes fired back to back. Pike and Clarion are better in in any other role it can pretend to fulfill with its missiles. And the hybrid niche isn't worth it. A slug can do everything better than proton or a thermite.

Killing some very good pilots and a **** ton of bads in a T2 doesn't make the ship viable.it's niche is too small and not good enough with all the problem plaguing torpedoes. As long as torpedoes won't be buffed, thT2 will hav no place in a competitive match.

 

Beside, Krix, you come across very agressively. Having to argue your way to respect and title isn't a great way to prove you're right. Be respectful of other. Stop being aggressive and listen to others, you could learn something.

 

PS. Sorry for all JC pilots who could have serched me.. I have been taking a pause of SWTOR for the Holidays. I should be back soon.

[LordByrondathird]

Another question about bombers.

 

What on earth is the Sledgehammer good for?

 

I feel like everything it can do, something else can do but better.

[Greezt]

Another question about bombers.

 

What on earth is the Sledgehammer good for?

 

I feel like everything it can do, something else can do but better.

 

Ooooh, I can answer that! It's fun:).

 

Edit: not to say the other bombers aren't fun, but it's pretty nice to have an engine maneuver, even if it's not a "serious" ship.

Edited January 8, 2016 by Greezt

[DakhathKilrathi]

I feel like everything it can do, something else can do but better.

 

That's because that's true. That's generally true for all of the "hybrid" ships (as well the strikes with the exception of the Clarion).

[Lavaar]

Another question about bombers.

 

What on earth is the Sledgehammer good for?

 

I feel like everything it can do, something else can do but better.

 

The sledgehammer SEEMS like it could be a good ship. Upon examining its components, you realize that it has a lot of good ones, and different combinations that SOUND like they would work well.

 

So let's go ahead and assume you try to fly this new "killer" T3 bomber build you have dreamed up. You start playing it and you think to yourself "wow! this ship is great! I am doing well, everyone must have overlooked this amazing build I have made!". This goes on a little while, until one day the premade shows up, and within a couple of minutes, the weaknesses of the ship become apparent. Following the match, the T3 is removed from your bar, never to be played again.

 

The T3 bomber suffers a lot of the same problems that the strike fighters suffer from, primarily that they do not have a niche at which they can excel, and instead attempt to cover multiple bases and end up actually being less versatile as a result. It is for this reason that the recent strike night on shadowlands, we decided to include the T3 bomber as permissible as well, and it fit in nicely among its strike bretheren.

 

The discussion of the T3 bomber and why it under performs is the same discussion as to why the strike fighter under performs. Ideally, and potential future buff for strikes will also cover some of the weaknesses that the T3 bomber possesses.

[Drakkolich]

About the bomber killers - how would a condor with directionals work, in your opinion? I've recently switched to directionals and wanna know if you think it's worth it.

 

Directionals can definitely work on a Condor/Jurgoran because this ship lacks an Armor minor component Distortion Field isn't as power on it as on a Mangler/Quarrel. Directionals can be very powerful in Gunship duels aswell since you essentially have the shields levels of Fortress shield. (assuming you have them angled forward)

 

I also like how using Directionals with Retro thrusters plays out on the ship. You get some really cool dog fighting power and also can do this cute maneuver where in a Gunship duel you fire your Slug railgun then immediately use Retro's. This lets you land your shot while shooting you in reverse out of range of theirs. It also keeps you angled forward so that your shields are still protecting you.

 

The more I play the Condor/Jurgoran in a serious setting the more I feel the shield is really down to a personal choice. While I believe Distortion is superior to Directionals on a ship that can also have Lightweight armor on a ship that doesn't have it Directionals seem about on part with Distortion.

 

Now when solo queue ing with the Condor/Jurgoran I wouldn't recommend using the Retro thruster tactic as this Directionals + Retro build is much more suited for being in a low moving premade team. Because you can much more easily predict where your enemies are going to come from to angle your shields and you don't need to be breaking missiles constantly as your team is all around you peeling for you. If you want to use Directionals while solo queue ing I'd go with Power Dive as your engine maneuver to give you some mobility and a little more missile breaking power.

 

Another question about bombers.

 

What on earth is the Sledgehammer good for?

 

I feel like everything it can do, something else can do but better.

 

For me I don't even consider the Sledgehammer/Decimus a Bomber anymore it plays way too much like a Strike fighter. Now as a Strike Fighter the Sledgehammer/Decimus is definitely the most lethal of it's kind and really tanky, it might not have as much shield power as the Clarion/Imperium but it has so much extra health it's a real pain to take down. It's weapons synchronize really well with each other, I play Heavy lasers, with Concussion missiles and Concussion mines. The mines give you some breathing room while the rest of your weapon ranges line up perfectly.

 

Now as others have mentioned because this ship plays so much like a Strike fighter it suffers the same problem as the Strike fighter. It's trying to do too many things at once, it doesn't specialize better then other ships. So while it can deny an area on a satellite and still engage meaningfully off a satellite, there are other ships that can do each of those jobs better. In game where you can have 5 ships on your bar you really can have a ship for each job you need to do and well rounded ships get pushed the side in favor of doing one job really well.

 

 

Think of it this when you raid in an mmo would you ever want one of your healers to be able to do 75% as good as healing as a normal healer but also be able to do 75% as good of dps as a regular dps? No you want all your members to be super specialized and just do their job as best as possible. This is exactly what's happening in GSF you want your team to each do their job super well, it's even more compounded by the fact that each player can swap roles on death.

 

 

 

Thanks for all the questions guys! I'll be out of town for a few days but go ahead and post your questions and I can get to them when I get back or I'm sure some other players will drop in and help answer them.

[MaximilianPower]

Think of it this when you raid in an mmo would you ever want one of your healers to be able to do 75% as good as healing as a normal healer but also be able to do 75% as good of dps as a regular dps? No you want all your members to be super specialized and just do their job as best as possible. This is exactly what's happening in GSF you want your team to each do their job super well, it's even more compounded by the fact that each player can swap roles on death.

 

I like that analogy, never really thought about it that way. Kinda like a tank in dps spec or something. Following this logic - it might be fun to play healer that can also dish out some damage, but it's never going to be optimal.

 

I'll remember that and try to explain it to new GSF folks this way.

[SeCKSEgai]

Listen up junior I am an ace and I am better with the t2 gunship than you are with any ship

 

<baby Reiyn says otherwise, and I can post the screen of just such a match if you really need. (Unmastered quarrel with a handful of upgrades vs your fully mastered t2)

 

But really, this is a good example of what kind of pilot not to be. When you have to constantly tell people you're an ace and go so far as putting it in your sig all the while being condescending towards random pilots - DON'T be that guy.

[Greezt]

About capacitors: both yallia and you said that damage per shot is preferable to overall DPS. That makes sense, but then why not always choose damage capacitor (at least over frequency)?

[Drakkolich]

About capacitors: both yallia and you said that damage per shot is preferable to overall DPS. That makes sense, but then why not always choose damage capacitor (at least over frequency)?

 

You're completely right for dealing damage purposes we choose damage per shot, however there are instances/builds where frequency can make a difference.

 

For example with Heavy lasers no matter the Capacitor you choose it always takes 3 shots to kill a defense turret in Domination, so if you choose Frequency Capacitor you can kill turrets 15% faster. This lets kill all 3 turrets on a Satellite much faster when clearing it. It also let's you shoot down enemy mines faster.

 

 

You also have some really high burst damage builds like Sanic's. Where he runs Quads with Pods/Clusters, Blaster Overcharge and Concentrated fire. The entire idea of the build is to kill a target before he can even react, in this instant the extra 5% dps from Frequency is what he chooses he's trying to eek out as much possible damage in that small time frame before a pilot can even react to move.

 

 

I hope that gives you an idea of why/when some players choose to use Frequency, myself I only use it with Heavy's and Light laser's.

 

Alright that was my last question I'm literally walking out the door after I hit submit reply.

[MDVZ]

About capacitors: both yallia and you said that damage per shot is preferable to overall DPS. That makes sense, but then why not always choose damage capacitor (at least over frequency)?

 

There area couple of regular circumstances where you have firing windows of a second or two against targets that are easy to aim at. With very small windows with highly evasive (actually moving, not the mechanic) targets, landing each shot and wasting as few as possible into space is best, so highest damage all day. With slow, lumbering (bomber on node) or stationary (GS) targets, you have a whole couple of seconds and getting extra shots can make frequency more effective than its 15% dps suggests. It can be, lets say, let you get, say, 4 shots on the target where you would have got 3 without it, which is obviously 30% more damage, rather than 15 or 10.

 

So I would say it depends what you're planning to shoot at most.

[Greezt]

There area couple of regular circumstances where you have firing windows of a second or two against targets that are easy to aim at. With very small windows with highly evasive (actually moving, not the mechanic) targets, landing each shot and wasting as few as possible into space is best, so highest damage all day. With slow, lumbering (bomber on node) or stationary (GS) targets, you have a whole couple of seconds and getting extra shots can make frequency more effective than its 15% dps suggests. It can be, lets say, let you get, say, 4 shots on the target where you would have got 3 without it, which is obviously 30% more damage, rather than 15 or 10.

So I would say it depends what you're planning to shoot at most.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I assume 30% more than no capacitors, but that's no comparison, and anyway it depends on the blaster. Quads actually get an extra shot in the first second with frequency capacitors, but RFL don't (that's weird...).

 

Anyway, I'm gonna rethink my capacitors now... I think it does mostly depend on what you're planning to do with them, but some guns benefit from some capacitors more than they do from others.

[Danalon]

On my T2 Scouts I use Booster Recharge instead of TT/BO. It's just a gut feeling but after trying all capacitors I found Frequency Capacitor to be the most useful for my build. As others have said, it makes it easier to kill a Gunship before it reacts and it's also helpful when killing bombers. It helps killing turrets faster, which saves shield energy and in some situations it might help to get an extra shot at a target before it hides behind an obstacle. Edited January 10, 2016 by Danalon

[Lavaar]

I use damage capacitor on my builds for a very simple, personal preference reason. Consistency.

 

I often roll toons on new servers so I have a lot of different ships at various states of mastery. Damage capacitor keeps the range and ROF the same for me no matter what server I am flying on, which makes it easier to stay consistent. While frequency is better usually for sustained DPS, and range increases flexibility as well makes it easier to get into the "sweet spot" of close range blasting, damage has always worked well for me as I don't have to adjust my habits regarding blaster consumption, or change when I start shooting. Range capacitors would also change the synergy I have between the cluster missiles and the laser blast ranges.

 

There are advantages and disadvantages to all three, but I think in this particular instance there isn't really a wrong answer, as all three are quite well balanced.

[Greezt]

I'm not sure about that. I used to have range capacitor on my T2 BLC, but now I think damage might actually be better overall, or maybe frequency (gotta find out how to deal with the drain, though). In the end it comes down to preference, but I'm pretty sure you could get better results for certain blasters with certain capacitors.

 

Damage is the steady one, but frequency can really boost certain lasers (like quads and lasers) just by giving them that extra shot in the first second.

 

On my T2 Scouts I use Booster Recharge instead of TT/BO. It's just a gut feeling but after trying all capacitors I found Frequency Capacitor to be the most useful for my build. As others have said, it makes it easier to kill a Gunship before it reacts and it's also helpful when killing bombers. It helps killing turrets faster, which saves shield energy and in some situations it might help to get an extra shot at a target before it hides behind an obstacle.

 

What's your last upgrade on booster recharge? The regen to shield and weapon power? That makes sense to me.

[phalczen]

I thought Verain did the math to prove Range capacitors are best in slot for BLCs?

 

(That's not his only thread on the topic but it is a recent one, and I know its not his thread but he does contribute a lot to it and links his orginal thread)

P.S. Is Verain alive? Denver has gotten a lot of snow recently...

Edited January 10, 2016 by phalczen

[Danalon]

What's your last upgrade on booster recharge? The regen to shield and weapon power? That makes sense to me.

 

It is. Tried both but I don't need even more engine power except on extremely rare occasions. The Reactor Boost upgrade is a very minor shield heal and I hardly ever run out of weapon power too. I also can use Turning Thrusters and Increased Turning Rate on Retros which make the ship incredibly maneuverable.

 

I thought Verain did the math to prove Range capacitors are best in slot for BLCs?

 

Statistically Range Capacitors are the best option for BLC because of the steep damage dropoff BLC has. I use RC on my Gunships because it's more helpful when I'm forced to dogfight. However I prefer FC on my T2 Scouts because the higher maximum DPS somewhat counteracts the missing damage cooldown. When attacking Bombers I need every DPS I can get and when attacking Gunships Wingman usually is enough to counter their DF. I don't joust other scouts (except the bad piloted ones), so the additional accuracy RC gives isn't crucial.

 

I built my T2 Scout to fit my personal preferences, it's worse in some but better in other situations.

Also, the statistically best option isn't necessarily the most enjoyable for everyone.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Danalon

[MDVZ]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I assume 30% more than no capacitors, but that's no comparison, and anyway it depends on the blaster. .

 

Not exactly. What I generally mean is that frequency capacitor converges down on 15% extra damage from 100% extra damage (theoretically; two shots where you would have had 1). But it needs 7 shots to converge down on 15%, at which point it levels out. To put it another way, If frequency affords you one or more extra shots up to 6, then it's actually more than 15% extra damage.

 

Ironically, this effect is most pronounced with low ROF, high damage per shot blasters. High RoF guns converge on the 15% faster than low RoF guns, and the Extra Shot Effect (I'm naming it that for conversation sake) makes less difference anyway because of lower damage. So, yes, it absolutely depends on the gun and depends on the target.

 

It also depends on other stuff in your build as to whether you think it's worth it. When I run pods with BLC, for example, I run range so they synergise better. When I run clusters, I run whatever I feel like, but it's often frequency for Extra Shot Effect.

[Ramalina]

I thought Verain did the math to prove Range capacitors are best in slot for BLCs?

 

(That's not his only thread on the topic but it is a recent one, and I know its not his thread but he does contribute a lot to it and links his orginal thread)

P.S. Is Verain alive? Denver has gotten a lot of snow recently...

 

So, to really understand this, you should know how to graph an integer step function, which is how you'd accurately portray blaster fire in GSF for a math model.

 

A step function looks like a staircase, but without the verticals between individual steps. Each step "floats."

 

Normally you'd draw this with damage as the y axis, and time as the x axis.

 

Figure 1 step function.

damage
.
.                       -----
.                -----
.        ------
. -----
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . time 

 

Once you have the basic step function, then you have to know how the capacitors modify it.

 

Damage, just makes each step higher, by the same amount, 15%. It takes effect on each successful hit. So it helps quite a bit, right from the start, unless you miss.

 

Range shifts the step function to the left a little (you get to start shooting a little bit earlier due to the extra range), it also increases the probability of a hit at any range over 500m, and at any range greater than 500m it also slightly increases the damage per step based on range. All of these effects are fairly small, but work right from the start (or even before the start compared to other capacitors) and add up to a reasonably powerful overall effect.

 

Frequency just makes the length of the steps on the time axis shorter. It doesn't have any effect at all until the end of the first shot. At that point the second shot fires ahead of the competing capacitors, and it gains a roughly 90% advantage compared to them, but that advantage lasts only for a tiny fraction of a second until the competing gun + capacitor combo fires, and then frequency falls behind again. With each shot fired that temporary advantage lasts a little bit longer until, eventually, the gun with frequency always has a one shot lead on the slower firing cannons. So it shines in long term average damage if there's continuous fire. Even so, the long term damage advantage only winds up being around 5% because the greater damage per shot and/or increased hit from the other capacitors makes up for their slower firing rates.

 

Basically there's a scale between ease of use and power of effect. Range is the most likely to provide a benefit on any given shot, but the benefit on average will be the smallest available benefit. Frequency is the least likely to provide any benefit at all. Going an entire week of matches and seeing 0 points of effective damage contribution from frequency on a BLC scout wouldn't really be outrageously weird. Still, if you can land 4 or more shots per attack run, it's almost certainly going to be the most powerful capacitor. Damage capacitor is the simplest effect to understand, and the ease of use and average size of effect is intermediate between the other two. If you think you're only going to get one shot in most encounters then damage is by far the best option.

 

TL: DR version, it's mathy, somewhat complicated, and which capacitor is best really depends on circumstances.

 

Range and Damage are definitely always at least ok choices. For Frequency, if you can't land a continuous stream of at least 4-5 shots on every target you attack, then there's a fair chance that the other options would outperform it almost all of the time.

 

The other point to keep in mind is that the differences between capacitors usually isn't enough to change the expected outcome of a fight. If 400 damage is enough to kill the target, then the difference between a 730 damage BLC shot and a 770 damage BLC shot really doesn't matter. So, "pick what you find pleasing and don't worry about it too much," is generally the best advice.

[phalczen]

So, to really understand this, you should know how to graph an integer step function, which is how you'd accurately portray blaster fire in GSF for a math model.

 

A step function looks like a staircase, but without the verticals between individual steps. Each step "floats."

 

 

So, I thought years ago a yellow name came in and clarified that Accuracy's impact on damage is actually a linear function with interpolation between the breakpoints listed in the tooltip? In other words, it doesn't actually step down but progresses linearly with distance. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to search the forums for that post, but, well, you know how easy it is to search these forums.

[Greezt]

So, I thought years ago a yellow name came in and clarified that Accuracy's impact on damage is actually a linear function with interpolation between the breakpoints listed in the tooltip? In other words, it doesn't actually step down but progresses linearly with distance. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to search the forums for that post, but, well, you know how easy it is to search these forums.

 

Accuracy doesn't affect damage. Both accuracy and damage are linearly interpolated between the points listed on the tooltips, but they are separate stats.

[Drakkolich]

So, I thought years ago a yellow name came in and clarified that Accuracy's impact on damage is actually a linear function with interpolation between the breakpoints listed in the tooltip? In other words, it doesn't actually step down but progresses linearly with distance. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to search the forums for that post, but, well, you know how easy it is to search these forums.

 

Accuracy and Damage do indeed progress linearly with distance. You don't suddenly start dealing more damage just because you crossed the 3000m distance line for example.

 

This might have been one the questions they answered during one of the livestreams and as such we don't actually have something in writing sadly. We've tested it many times though just to make sure and that's definitely how it works.

 

Also I'm back!

[Danalon]

So, I thought years ago a yellow name came in and clarified that Accuracy's impact on damage is actually a linear function with interpolation between the breakpoints listed in the tooltip? In other words, it doesn't actually step down but progresses linearly with distance. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to search the forums for that post, but, well, you know how easy it is to search these forums.

 

You're talking about a different thing. Damage and accuracy progress linearly with range. The step function doesn't have much to do with that.

 

The step function in this case displays how much total damage you deal over time in an ideal situation (constant distance to target and no misses).

The reason why BLC is so strong is, that it's steps are so huge. Other weapons have more theoretical DPS but at the beginning of each BLC step it surpasses the other weapons for the first few shots. The shorter the uptime on a target, the more damage does BLC compared to other weapons.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Danalon

[Ramalina]

So, I thought years ago a yellow name came in and clarified that Accuracy's impact on damage is actually a linear function with interpolation between the breakpoints listed in the tooltip? In other words, it doesn't actually step down but progresses linearly with distance. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to search the forums for that post, but, well, you know how easy it is to search these forums.

 

I know the post you're talking about, and there's a link to it on the first page of the Stasiepedia.

 

You missed a very fine distinction between a model of the damage done in an actual fight, and modifiers to the damage of any specific given shot.

 

Shots fired and damage done are discrete integer values. Firing a BLC looks like: (time_0, shot_1_dmg 653, total_dmg_t0 = 653), (time_0.75, shot_2_dmg 770, total_dmg_t.75 = 1423), (time_1.5, shot_3_dmg 890, total_dmg_t1.5 = 2313). Plot that out in a time vs damage display and you get a step function.

 

The range modifier is calculated as a continuous function, but then it gets rounded to the nearest one point of damage, so technically it's also really a step function in terms of game output. You can't have 650.359 damage in GSF. It gets rounded, probably to 650. In this case though, the results are so close that you can model with a linear continuous function without creating significant errors.

 

For deciding which capacitor you want with a particular cannon, on a particular ship, flown in a particular style, the step functions that model damage done in a fight are what give you the best information for making that choice.

 

Unless you like the math though, following the general recommendations is easiest. Or ask about a specific case and hope that someone who likes the math modelling has time to figure it out in a timely fashion.