Variable reload times hurt slower missiles

[mr_sim]

I would be shocked if a reduced cooldown made protorps actually that great. If you're seriously rocking out with them- seriously dominating- then I'd say you are probably STILL undercompensated for your skill level.

 

Not quite sure what you mean by "still undecompensated"

 

Also since the game is full of players of all skill levels writing people off as mere noobs is irrelevant as the torpedos are doing their job regardless.

 

I will say this off proton torpedos, they are the only reliable fire and forget weapon in the game IMO. If you have some hull damage and I get a lock and fire a protorp I will likely tab to the next target immediately even before the torpedo finishes it's long range travel to target, and I find I normally do get the kill.

[Verain]

Not quite sure what you mean by "still undecompensated"

 

Ok, you are either just above average and are viewing your proton performance versus poor to average players who don't have all their breaks or don't know LOS, -OR- you are so good at the component that you don't even understand that the game isn't giving you the kills it should be for the level you are playing at.

 

Also since the game is full of players of all skill levels writing people off as mere noobs is irrelevant as the torpedos are doing their job regardless.

 

I think they are not good enough at their job, and I think there's several reasons as to why- but the cooldown is simply an extra debuff.

[tunewalker]

Ok just wanted to clarify something.

 

 

Concussion missile Reload time is NOT 5.5 seconds standard. It is 6 second standard. The 5.5 happens when you take the crew member for reduced reload by 8% (Protons standard reload is 12 seconds reduced to 11 by the 8%).

 

Just wanted to clarify that. Honestly I think that companion could just be better as well. Maybe a 25% increased reload time or better yet 33%. If the Variable times were unchanged then the reload on Clusters would go from 3 seconds to 2 seconds (whoopdie do still spammable doesnt change much) Concs go from 6 to 4 seconds (much more noticeable and coming closer to spammable)

 

Other missiles go from 12 to 9 a very noticeable difference and brings it from needing assistance to land on a pilot with half a brain even if they dont LoS to being threatening to those pilots while still keeping the missile variance. This would favor larger missiles and ships that use said larger missiles thus ships that only use clusters (like the Flash fire) would not be affected much while the others would get the buff they need.

 

 

As is that crew member is worthless, if you are using that for the passive you are pretty much doing it wrong. There are 3 good passives right now. The first is a must have 6% accuracy, between tracking penalties weapons who's accuracy isnt perfect to begin with and evasion its just a must have. The other 2 are Firing Arc, great for easier missile locks and weapons that have very low tracking penalties. And Finally 25% more ammo, again great for weapons like Clusters and pods when you have no Magazine or are not sure if you are going to be able to reload as these run out quick while doing really high DPS so getting extra ammo for them is great.

Edited June 1, 2014 by tunewalker

[Altheran]

IMO, your proposition tune, improving the fast reload crew members make much more sense than a plain normalization.

 

Then maybe that Ion and EMP could have their CD slightly reduced, at Sabotage Probe level maybe... But I don't see their CD (and torpedoes') be reduced further without being too much of a buff.

[Ramalina]

Ok, you are either just above average and are viewing your proton performance versus poor to average players who don't have all their breaks or don't know LOS, -OR- you are so good at the component that you don't even understand that the game isn't giving you the kills it should be for the level you are playing at.

 

I think they are not good enough at their job, and I think there's several reasons as to why- but the cooldown is simply an extra debuff.

 

Protons really do reward long practice mastering the art of landing them on target. My Pike and Clarion kill rates and ratios are higher than my Starguard's, chiefly due to the lethality that proton torpedoes bring to the table (I normally run concussions on the Starguard).

 

They do rely on the opponent either making tactical errors, or being under pressure from another unit. Bombers crossing open space are the only ships that might truly be forced to take a proton torpedo hit, and even they should be able to avoid taking a second (with or without the proposed reload time alterations). So to a perfect pilot, proton torpedoes (and thermites) represent no threat at all to the majority of ships. The Devs have to balance considering the pilots that do fly in GSF though, and for that population protons represent anything from a minor to an extreme threat.

 

That said, if you really think that proton torpedoes need to be deadlier, the change you should be aiming at is reducing baseline lock on time by somewhere between 0.2 and 1 seconds. Keeping in mind that after a 1 second reduction proton torps would be grossly overpowered, at least in the hands of skilled users. A lock on time decrease of 0.25 to 0.5 seconds is more in the range of reasonable.

 

Lock on time and firing arc are the primary limitations on the lethality of the heavy missiles. Reload really only comes into play if you're already good enough with torps to be able to successfully fire one almost every time you attempt a lock on. That's a fairly small proportion of the overall GSF population from what I can tell. Sure, having a skilled pilot run out the clock on you until their break(s) is up again is annoying, but that's a high skill vs. high skill scenario. If you're worried about usability for less skilled users reload time doesn't have much of a payoff. Lock time reductions on the other hand are immediately useful for everyone. Firing arc is also an immediately noticeable change, but widening that feels like it changes the fundamental nature of the heaviest missiles more than a minor lock on reduction would.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Ramalina

[Pilgrim_Grey]

Lock on time and firing arc are the primary limitations on the lethality of the heavy missiles. Reload really only comes into play if you're already good enough with torps to be able to successfully fire one almost every time you attempt a lock on. That's a fairly small proportion of the overall GSF population from what I can tell. Sure, having a skilled pilot run out the clock on you until their break(s) is up again is annoying, but that's a high skill vs. high skill scenario. If you're worried about usability for less skilled users reload time doesn't have much of a payoff. Lock time reductions on the other hand are immediately useful for everyone. Firing arc is also an immediately noticeable change, but widening that feels like it changes the fundamental nature of the heaviest missiles more than a minor lock on reduction would.

 

That's the thing, though... the issue isn't necessarily with the arc or the lock on time, but with the odd and often arbitrary reload times we have. Are they a HUGE issue? No, but they aren't set up in a way that makes sense at the moment.

 

Just to give a case in point, I think the shield ignore and other benefits on Proton make it worthy of a longer lock and smaller arc than concussions, the issue isn't there (though I do sometimes wonder if the egregiously low speed is needed, even if I doubt they'll ever change it due to the speed boost at tier 4). But you can butt up against the reload time and it's not an extremely valid reload point, especially since, as you pointed out, lock on times and arcs are the things that make the big difference.

 

To sum it up: current reload times add an unnecessary drawback to missiles that is not needed when there are so many other balance points already in use, and actually create even greater imbalances with how they are currently implemented.

[mr_sim]

Ok, you are either just above average and are viewing your proton performance versus poor to average players who don't have all their breaks or don't know LOS, -OR- you are so good at the component that you don't even understand that the game isn't giving you the kills it should be for the level you are playing at.

 

 

 

I think they are not good enough at their job, and I think there's several reasons as to why- but the cooldown is simply an extra debuff.

 

So LOS keeps coming up and I want to address this.

 

Protorps in general are fired from mobile ships vs rail guns which are stationary. Also they are oft fired from strikes which have a decent amount of battle field manuverabilty.

 

But the real factor on protorps is the fact that(excepting GS) they always have the advantage of initiative over any other ship build. Torpedoes force the user to keep the range long to achieve a lock and this trains you to see a whole new aspect of the game.

 

If my target is clear enough of the situation to attempt LOS so be it they are now controlled. Fact is though most of my targets are too busy to ponder LOS or there is no available cover. In fact the amount of skill they need to identify the vector if the threat and achieve LOS cover is far greater then the skill I require to predict their likely response and compensate.

 

Next we talk of missile breaks, to which I say most of my targets fall to my torpedos with their breaks on CD. In fact most user their breaks properly during attempted lock because they don't know it's a torpedo lock yet they only know they are being painted, I personally break locks ASAP it's good practice IMO. Unfortunately as an experienced torpedo user I always expect my first attempt to fail and preplan my attack accordingly so I have longer time on target.

 

I've stated already and will say again. Torpedos are a completely different mindset, they have their own playbook written from scratch. I am both an experienced and mature player, I am also a heavy proton user I love the things. As a mature player I understand the price of buffs that are not nessesary, and a proton buff is not nessesary.

 

There are a list of components I do believe adjustments buffs for some nerfs for others: DF, BLC, PRG, and Ion missiles to name a fee. On the topic of torpedoes I am of the belief that they are stable enough to not risk game balance by Buffing them.

[Pilgrim_Grey]

Sim, I'm not casting doubt on your ability to get a lock and even a hit with protorps. I use them all the time and can do that as well.

 

I am agreeing with Verain that you're over-touting your own ability to land hits, however. The better and even decent gunship pilots I know aren't going to make it that easy for you to gain a first lock, and even if you get them decently in the first approach, the engagement is going to get closer and closer and make it harder and harder for you to re-establish a lock or get a second (because if the gunship gets hit by the first lock, they're an idiot). I'm not the best gunship pilot, but I generally am brought down due to laser fire because the ship is so unwieldy, not because of locks. And I know from experience that a decent gunship pilot is going to be harder to get a missile hit on. I can do it, but it's not as easy as you're making it out to be.

 

I don't fly bombers, but I've tangled with them more than enough to know that any missile locks can be hard to get when they are near cover (and if they're decent, they have cover to work with). Decent bombers aren't going to be out in the open for you get multiple protorp locks on, either, even on their way to the sat.

 

To be honest, I'm startled at the resistance to this idea. Clusters reload at a trivial rate and are spammable because of it, but they're pretty balanced otherwise. They could use a longer reload time to even them out. And the other missiles have more than enough drawbacks without deserving reload times north of 10 seconds. Heck, I'm not even sure how anyone can argue that there are consistent or good design choices made with reload times--I can see better decisions being made with firing arcs and reload times.

[tunewalker]

IMO, your proposition tune, improving the fast reload crew members make much more sense than a plain normalization.

 

Then maybe that Ion and EMP could have their CD slightly reduced, at Sabotage Probe level maybe... But I don't see their CD (and torpedoes') be reduced further without being too much of a buff.

 

Thank you , I also saw it as a bit of a risk reward system, almost no one using clusters is going to bother with it cus they lose either the Ammo or the Arc for it, cus no one is giving up accuracy for it, but for those ships who could use some love they may actually want to give up arc or ammo, HECK on a Pike it might be worth giving up the Accuracy just for Arc and Reload making missiles easier to land.

 

I think it makes more unique builds and allows for Reward and Risk more so if people honestly think normalizing is a problem .

[Ramalina]

So LOS keeps coming up and I want to address this.

 

Protorps in general are fired from mobile ships vs rail guns which are stationary. Also they are oft fired from strikes which have a decent amount of battle field manuverabilty.

 

Next we talk of missile breaks, to which I say most of my targets fall to my torpedos with their breaks on CD. In fact most user their breaks properly during attempted lock because they don't know it's a torpedo lock yet they only know they are being painted, I personally break locks ASAP it's good practice IMO. Unfortunately as an experienced torpedo user I always expect my first attempt to fail and preplan my attack accordingly so I have longer time on target.

 

 

Clearly there are different schools of thought on this even among practiced proton torpedo users.

 

I generally launch on bombers or strikes and scouts that I've seen use missile breaks recently and boost in close during or just after locking to reduce missile flight time. I find release ranges of 5 km to 2 km to be the sweet spot when balancing reduced flight time against difficulty of not losing the lock on a maneuvering target. If they're not very evasive I'll release farther out on a Pike so I have enough space to follow up with a concussion missile.

 

I try not to waste protons on a ship that I haven't seen burn a defensive cooldown.

 

Burning a missile break during the lock on phase is a serious tactical error most of the time. The exceptions are if you know it's a cluster (and soon also interdiction) missile (you won't have time to use the break in many cases after the short range missiles launch), or if you absolutely can't take another hit due to low hull and can get to excellent LOS cover in 4 seconds or less.

 

I'm very happy when people use breaks during lock, because that means that if they don't run for cover my chances for hitting them with a missile increase greatly. For the slow missiles, if you're too busy to LOS you should generally not press the break until you hear the launch warning. Then the defender has destroyed that missile, and rather than the aggressor having a ready to fire missile and the defender with a missile break on cooldown the situation is instead that the defender's break is on cooldown but so is the missile system that the aggressor just fired.

 

So on target selection and whether one should launch torps to encourage people to use missile breaks it's a matter of personal preference, outcomes aren't influence all that much.

 

On using missile breaks though, outside of the exceptions, breaking lock before the missile is launched at you is a serious tactical error that significantly decreases your survivability. It might be a bit different for people with latency over 500ms where lag eats up a big chunk of your reaction time but if you have a fast connection to the server breaking lock early is going to be a mistake in most cases.

 

For the most part I find that I don't need missile break to avoid protons, thermites, and a significant fraction of concussion missiles. There's enough time to get to LOS that if you're not very far from cover using the break isn't needed.

[Verain]

I generally launch on bombers or strikes and scouts that I've seen use missile breaks recently and boost in close during or just after locking to reduce missile flight time.

 

I agree, and I see the more aggressive missile users use similar tactics. I don't know if it's "correct", but it seems to be common enough and solid enough to recommend. The big thing I see as changing numbers is the sitaware needed to hardswap to a target that just burned his CD- that became very valuable after the missile break patch, because there's a real vulnerability after a target eliminates someone else's missile midflight. "So and so engine" is a great call to hear on a strike.

 

I try not to waste protons on a ship that I haven't seen burn a defensive cooldown.

 

Or thermites, and this can be very frustrating, as it reduces the targets, often by "the guy you need to actually kill" number of ships. And this is the thrust of this thread- this disadvantage seems totally unneeded, as does the one where you shot a proton, swapped to a new target, and of course, your proton is still on cooldown seven long seconds later.

 

Burning a missile break during the lock on phase is a serious tactical error most of the time. The exceptions are if you know it's a cluster (and soon also interdiction) missile (you won't have time to use the break in many cases after the short range missiles launch), or if you absolutely can't take another hit due to low hull and can get to excellent LOS cover in 4 seconds or less.

 

Well, with cluster, you actually normally CAN dodge the missile- there's just not much payoff with the machine-gun like rate of reload. And interdiction's much longer reload will reward you if you can cancel it in-flight.

 

 

The simple fact is, some ships are balanced around being forced to eat some missiles, but only bombers can eat the occasional proton, and no one can take a thermite and be in line of sight. But I argue that this is handled entirely by lockon times, flight times, and tiny reticules- that the cooldown is just a tertiary thing that, while it probably makes sense for interdiction missile, doesn't for proton, thermite, or even cluster. Ion and EMP- and for that matter, sab probe- have longer cooldowns than their other stats would predict, and while I think all but sab probe could come down, I sort of think those are separate issues. To me, ion feels like a niche concussion, and should have concussion's cooldown. I think EMP could have other changes made and it could be fine with a long cooldown, and I think sab probe's insanely fast missile speed and true devastation mean that it's mostly fine as is.

 

Specifically, I think we could see the cluster cooldown come up to approach concussion, and I think we could see proton and thermite come down to approach concussion.

 

 

For the most part I find that I don't need missile break to avoid protons, thermites, and a significant fraction of concussion missiles. There's enough time to get to LOS that if you're not very far from cover using the break isn't needed.

 

Agree totally, but it's ship dependent. I can often be tricked into tanking a concussion on a strike, or if I'm trying to fleet support as type 2 gunship. If I'm trying to fleet support as girl bomber, I can absolutely be caught with a proton or thermite out of range of everything, but unless I'm over extended or softswapped to by multiple bandits at once, I can often live through such an attack. Meanwhile, on scouts or type 1 gunship, I essentially never get hit with protons or thermites, and a concussion is very rare indeed.

[tunewalker]

For those of you using Thermites and not wanting to fire them at anything except vulnerable targets some quick tips (I do not intend to derail the thread just giving info to help out about the current state and how to use a weapon even if its not great right now)

 

1. Lock and dont fire- Sometimes just getting a lock can force some one to make a mistake, often times if you continually give them that tone 1 of a few things will happen they will fly towards more open space waiting for you to fire so they can missile break with impunity which leaves them open to laser fire and death by lasers, or 2 they break early and are now a vulnerable target for finishing the lock which for you isnt reloading because you didnt fire.

 

 

2. Getting under 1k metters with a speed upgrade, this one is a common trick to have people eat the missile before they can react.

 

3. Fire the missile on some one any way, If you know there are other missile users on him or near by that can be just as deadly forcing an engine maneuver can create a vulnerable target for your buddies to clean up.

 

4. If you have the ability Lockdown and they have already blown DF try to get them to use their engine energy and then use Lockdown to drain them dry and fire the missile at the same time. This will leave them with out enough energy to use their second missile break. I have done this on all kinds of missiles before and find it one of the most reliable ways to land missiles on those pesky scouts. They use DF and think they are safe because they still have a missile break up and enough energy, then I drain that energy essentially taking away that missile break. If they had known it was coming they likely would have gone and LoSed me or used the engine ability first instead of the DF, but because DF and an engine maneuver have often gotten scouts to feel very secure about their ability to avoid missiles this can force a mistake allowing a missile to land that other wise would have been easy to dodge.

Edited June 2, 2014 by tunewalker

[Verain]

A downside with lockdown is copilot. Imperials get Doctor Lokin, a reasonable tactical option, or Andronikus (no). Republicans get C2N2, a reasonable engineering option who has an awful voice but does forgo the -13% blaster fire, a pretty big deal, or Gus Tuno, a defensive choice with some really poor secondaries (damage reduction and quick recharge).

 

Not the end of the world.

[tunewalker]

A downside with lockdown is copilot. Imperials get Doctor Lokin, a reasonable tactical option, or Andronikus (no). Republicans get C2N2, a reasonable engineering option who has an awful voice but does forgo the -13% blaster fire, a pretty big deal, or Gus Tuno, a defensive choice with some really poor secondaries (damage reduction and quick recharge).

 

Not the end of the world.

 

Absolutely, its a risk 100% if you dont have lockdown for it I still gave 3 more tactics that can be very effective .

 

 

Edit: just to be clear, i have lockdown on only 1 of my strikes right now, though I have used it on several of them it just depends on my mood what Co-pilot ability I use, so just to be clear i DO NOT expect many people to take lockdown.

 

 

Edit 2: sorry for the minor derail on the thread my bad, just wanted to share tips with people having issues in the current less then optimal meta when it comes to dealing with the crap long reloads.

Edited June 2, 2014 by tunewalker

[Ryuku-sama]

4. If you have the ability Lockdown and they have already blown DF try to get them to use their engine energy and then use Lockdown to drain them dry and fire the missile at the same time. This will leave them with out enough energy to use their second missile break. I have done this on all kinds of missiles before and find it one of the most reliable ways to land missiles on those pesky scouts. They use DF and think they are safe because they still have a missile break up and enough energy, then I drain that energy essentially taking away that missile break. If they had known it was coming they likely would have gone and LoSed me or used the engine ability first instead of the DF, but because DF and an engine maneuver have often gotten scouts to feel very secure about their ability to avoid missiles this can force a mistake allowing a missile to land that other wise would have been easy to dodge.

 

Power Dive doesn't need engine power... I used it at less than 5 engine powwer often enough to evade multiple lock-on...

[Zharik]

Power Dive doesn't need engine power... I used it at less than 5 engine powwer often enough to evade multiple lock-on...

 

Pretty sure that Power Dive uses 5 power when upgraded. Try boosting to zero and using your Power Dive... betcha it doesn't work until you get 5 engine regen'd.

 

How did you see your exact engine power level (as a number) anyway??

[Ryuku-sama]

Pretty sure that Power Dive uses 5 power when upgraded. Try boosting to zero and using your Power Dive... betcha it doesn't work until you get 5 engine regen'd.

 

How did you see your exact engine power level (as a number) anyway??

 

Maybe.... HUD is quite innaccurate. My engine level was around 0 (Novadive with 145 engine speed (StE Converter and Booster Recharge)) and I Power Dived....

[TrinityLyre]

Maybe.... HUD is quite innaccurate. My engine level was around 0 (Novadive with 145 engine speed (StE Converter and Booster Recharge)) and I Power Dived....

 

It really would be nice if the UI showed actual values. Since, you know, you can see the opponent's shield/hull percentage but not your own. I've always found that a bit silly.

Edited June 3, 2014 by TrinityLyre