Component swapping or Ship build pre-sets please

[Verain]

Yes, we do have a track record. We had me saying Minelayers needed a nerf--which was driven far more by concerns over accessibility and fun than they were about Strikes alone. And we had you fighting me at every turn, saying that ANY nerf to mine shield piercing would "delete Bombers" and calling my posts "cry threads", despite the fact that I'd been abusing SIMs myself for weeks.

 

They were, and are, cry threads. The fact that you yourself don't favor scouts doesn't matter- your threads were the focal point of monobattlescout players hoisting banners. The net effect of these threads, which the devs clearly listened to, was to shift the meta to scouts.

 

And while not all of my suggested changes were made, some were. And did Bombers get deleted? No.

 

Like... kind of? I don't see them very often on Domination compared to before. Boy bombers, in particular, have very little role in the modern meta. In fact, the seeker mines being mostly not nerfed and everything ELSE continuing to ignore aoe mostly means that girl bombers are relatively stronger.

 

But I see scouts hiding in niches on nodes again, and taking a long time to root out. I see all the dumb crap where like one guy who is pretty good can hold a node for far too long, and require a pincer strat or multiple bombers. Maybe that junk is intended, but I really liked it when it wasn't there.

 

Did Domination become more fun and accessible? I think so. I haven't seen anyone say they preferred 2.7 to 2.8. Have you?

 

I preferred 2.7 to 2.8. I don't think I'm the only one, either.

 

Does anyone think the change to Interdiction Mine or mine AOE was bad for the game? Because Verain of old seemed to think any such nerfs would bring about the Scoutpocolypse.

 

I think 2.8 has proven my predictions correct. To the extent that it didn't is the extent that seismic didn't get trashbinned as well. But bombers just don't hold nodes like they used to... but they still are awful at everything else.

 

The problem is that even if Strikes got all the buffs you requested, Verain--even if a StarGuard became a better generalist than a Flashfire, there is no reason to fly one when you can bring 5 specialist ships into battle and change between them at will.

 

Whatever. I'd be sad if the devs fell for this new crusade.

 

"specialists". Gimme a break. Your method of analyzing things is just broken. Strikes aren't generalists, and they aren't being selected against because the bar is too big. If anything, the bar is not big enough for the strikes.

 

But others have correctly pointed out that as there are really only three specialized roles

 

Those distinctions aren't even correct. Your whole map is upside down and wet!

 

While your idea of requiring everyone to ready one ship of each major type, along with one wildcard, is neat, it wouldn't do anything to encourage people to play T1 or T2 Strikes in a competitive match. I think everyone would just declare the T3 as their token Strike, since it actually has some "best at role" builds for satellite defense.

 

Yup. And that would be fine. Hey guess what: if you want the T1 strike, which is a bad ship, and the T2 strike, which is a worse ship, to be played, you need to buff them. The devs nerfed them MASSIVELY with that barrel roll nerf. Suddenly the Pike and Starguard lost any manner of 10 second missile break, and the Pike can't even have retros, because IT MIGHT ACTUALLY LAND A MISSILE OH NOES.

 

They weren't even good before that. But while you used to use a missile break, be immune for three seconds, and after that immunity, have seven seconds before your next cooldown- meaning a missile launched at 9.5 wouldn't hit you because your break would be back up- that actually meant you had about a four-five second window where you could be locked and hit. Post nerf, that window goes up to like fourteen seconds. While a scout can still chain distortion, the strike cannot. The net effect of these changes is that strikes are pretty damned vulnerable.

 

 

We have literally just seen a lot of strike nerfs. Every patch they are either nerfed directly or the meta makes them worse.

 

But I don't know that anyone is going to use a Sledgehammer or Decimus in a serious match.

 

That's because they aren't amazing. And I actually could see them flown in a serious match, but I agree their total power isn't off the chart.

 

Not when they could pick one of five super specialized builds instead.

 

No, there's more powerful builds. And plenty of builds aren't that specialized. Is burst/cluster/blaster overcharge/disto/barrel|retro "specialized"? No, quads and pods is specialized. But I see plenty of both. Not because scouts are "more specialized" but because they are too good.

 

I do agree with your four numbered points, and I'm glad you acknowledge that slugs are still hitting a little too hard, especially given the lack of warning. I again maintain that shield piercing is the big culprit here. If slug had no piercing, then strong shields (which are a Strike specialty), would make them more resilient against slug railguns. Unfortunately, no amount of shielding can save a Strike from the huge energy drain from an ion railgun hit. That itself is a sort of shield piercing as well.

 

The energy drain is fine now. The snare and reactor disruption are a real choice. If someone is going for the reactor, he has a real bone to pick with gunships and strikes, at the cost of a huge support piece. I think the snare is generally better, and the nerfed disruption is just way more reasonable to be hit with as a strike.

 

Getting rid of shield piercing entirely seems lame, given the lack of railgun options. Slug is just too well defined by those things. If plasma ignored armor and slug had the shield piercing that would probably be a wiser setup. I will say that the shield piercing could come down some on slug, but if it did, you wouldn't want to mess with the damage. I'd rather have strikes have a mild inherent repair, like an R2 unit, rather than eliminate shield piercing. Again, the problem isn't "every component that pierces shields". We have a ship that has a lot of shields as its defense (the strike fighter), and then every weapon with shield piercing is too good against that ship. Does that mean the problem is shield piercing? Or that ship?

 

 

So yea, you're doing it again. And the devs are eating it up, because according to some metric that they won't share, strikes are fine. Hence, they are willing to nerf mines for all bombers, nerf railguns for all gunships, nerf engines for all ships period, all instead of fixing the problem. And your posts just encourage them to have faith in whatever model they used to balance the game in the first place, even though it CLEARLY gives the strikes the short end of the stick, probably because it overvalues shield or hull or something.

 

And so now you want fewer ships to choose from, a reduction in player power, because you think THAT will fix the issue? I'm actually afraid that they will be persuaded, I really am. It will make the game so much worse.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Verain

[Nemarus]

 

So yea, you're doing it again. And the devs are eating it up, because according to some metric that they won't share, strikes are fine. Hence, they are willing to nerf mines for all bombers, nerf railguns for all gunships, nerf engines for all ships period, all instead of fixing the problem. And your posts just encourage them to have faith in whatever model they used to balance the game in the first place, even though it CLEARLY gives the strikes the short end of the stick, probably because it overvalues shield or hull or something.

 

And so now you want fewer ships to choose from, a reduction in player power, because you think THAT will fix the issue? I'm actually afraid that they will be persuaded, I really am. It will make the game so much worse.

 

The devs might pay attention to more of your posts if you didn't mix your intelligent suggestions and facts with the juvenile bile. Your signature alone shows you take too much pleasure in trolling and pissing people off and that kind of attitude is rarely going to be rewarded in any professional environment.

 

As for this topic, don't worry. This isn't some crusade of mine. It was a brief, idle musing written while I waited for a binary to deploy. And the comments, both from you and others, have convinced me that reducing the readied ships would not make anything better.

 

I do still believe that, if the devs truly intend the Strike's greatest strength to be its versatility, then it is doomed--because versatility isn't needed if you have a Sniper, a Speed Scout, a Dogfighting Scout, and a Node Holder in your readied bar. I think if the Strike is to be saved, then each variant needs to be able to stand up and say, "I am best at <thing>." Right now the T3 has a legit claim to being the best at healing/tanking/holding a node. The T1 and T2 do not have such a claim--what sketchy role they did have is now done best by the T3 Bomber and T3 Gunship.

 

As for the current meta, it's still pretty fluid on The Ebon Hawk. I still see many Bombers of both types, and in Domination I still find Seismic Mines kill me a lot--not only in Scouts, but in anything without significant hull healing. But through attrition, the Bombers are dying.

 

In TDM, formations of Gunships and Dronecarriers still present a wall of invincibility to anyone but the most coordinated veteran teams.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Nemarus

[Verain]

The devs might pay attention to more of your posts if you didn't mix your intelligent suggestions and facts with the juvenile bile.

 

Lol, I doubt that has anything to do with anything.

 

 

Your signature alone shows you take too much pleasure in trolling and pissing people off and that kind of attitude is rarely going to be rewarded in any professional environment.

 

This isn't a professional environment, it's a video game forum, many of whom whine and complain instead of trying to get good. Even good players such as yourself have a pretty specific view of How Things Should Work, and honestly, they often just aren't correct.

 

I don't troll people at my work place, but at my work place people don't come in and try to crap up my job.

 

I think if the Strike is to be saved, then each variant needs to be able to stand up and say, "I am best at <thing>."

 

You nailed it. That's exactly it. Those ships need a damned job. Being able to switch between two of four mediocre guns, or two of a zillion missiles, many of which are poor, isn't a thing.

 

Right now the T3 has a legit claim to being the best at healing/tanking/holding a node. The T1 and T2 do not have such a claim--what sketchy role they did have is now done best by the T3 Bomber and T3 Gunship.

 

Specifically that T3 bomber. The T3 gunship is really not able to missile like a strike, but he has a nice railgun. I will say that the T3 gunship obsoletes the T2 gunship, but that one is pretty far behind the power curve in the first place.

 

In TDM, formations of Gunships and Dronecarriers still present a wall of invincibility to anyone but the most coordinated veteran teams.

 

 

An uncoordinate gunball is pretty easy to shatter IMO, and a scout is a key part of that shattering. But TDM didn't have a job for boy bombers in the first place, and the meta there didn't change. Scouts are a big part of that meta.

[dancezwithnubz]

In TDM, formations of Gunships and Dronecarriers still present a wall of invincibility to anyone but the most coordinated veteran teams.

 

I'd prefer to think of it as "formations of Gunships and Dronecarriers provide a worthy challenge and a good fight"

 

PROVIDED i have the tools available in my hanger to have a serious crack at that "wall of invincibility".

 

Oh dear.

 

I've set my Blackbolt up with LC/Pods/Boost/Barrel/Disto/Speed for TDM and 'generic' Domination scouting duties.

 

If only I'd left it with LC/Thermites/EMP/Barrel/Disto/Regen, I could blow a huge hole in that "wall of invincibility" that even my PUG teammates should be able to exploit...

 

I'm not saying I'm in love with Bombers & Gunships.

I hate flying them, I know that much.

Bombers brought a whole new different dimension to the game, one I find occasionally frustrating but often rewarding.

 

What I find frustrating is being 'forced' to sacrifice a slot on my hanger bar for a T1 Gunship as a 'go-to general build that can handle anything'.

 

Given the choice, I'd have three Blackbolts and two Bloodmarks on my hanger bar.

[Nemarus]

Verain, one thing to consider about devs implementing your suggestions--it takes time.

 

I was harping on Bombers for months, and patches both large and small went by without any changes.

 

They may be considering your Strike ideas, but just haven't gotten to them yet. Remember a big balance patch is coming.

 

My second piece of advice would be to spend less energy arguing with others deep in the replies of threads. You made some huge posts in this thread, filled with lots of good points--but all of that effort was just to convince me and other forumers. I doubt the devs are following this particular thread 3 pages deep.

 

If you go through the all that work to make a big list of items (with colored text ), then go ahead and put it in its own thread with its own thesis. That way the devs, or Musco, will have a better chance of picking it out as something worthy of consideration.

[havokhead]

I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this idea!! I've even thought of suggesting it myself but after thinking it through I gave up the notion. Here's why, this goes against MMO dev rules including BW's. The "keep'em playing & keep'em paying" rule, which is the ultimate mmo rule btw. If you had the chance to max-out a novadive and place 2 or 3 versions of the same ship in your deployment bar then you wouldn't need more ship types & you wouldn't need to grind out more req for better components. This is a cardinal sin amongst devs. Worst of all, if you grew bored & started complaining to BW that we need more ships and more variety, more skins and more playstyles. No, no, no BW cannot have this, you need more ships to do generally the same thing so you need more cartel coins & grind more req. "keep'em playing & keep'em playing" ssshhhh....

 

-J'exx (republic privateer) 55'slinger THE Ebon Hawk

-Stalker (imperial Intellegence) 36 agent THE Ebon Hawk

[dancezwithnubz]

I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this idea!! I've even thought of suggesting it myself but after thinking it through I gave up the notion. Here's why, this goes against MMO dev rules including BW's. The "keep'em playing & keep'em paying" rule, which is the ultimate mmo rule btw. If you had the chance to max-out a novadive and place 2 or 3 versions of the same ship in your deployment bar then you wouldn't need more ship types & you wouldn't need to grind out more req for better components. This is a cardinal sin amongst devs. Worst of all, if you grew bored & started complaining to BW that we need more ships and more variety, more skins and more playstyles. No, no, no BW cannot have this, you need more ships to do generally the same thing so you need more cartel coins & grind more req. "keep'em playing & keep'em playing" ssshhhh....

 

-J'exx (republic privateer) 55'slinger THE Ebon Hawk

-Stalker (imperial Intellegence) 36 agent THE Ebon Hawk

 

errrr, no.

 

more slots on the hanger bar gives me more room to play around with builds which means I will probably spend more CC converting requisition.

 

as it stands, i don't have to convert req anymore because 4/5 on my hanger slots are already mastered.