Let's talk about Strike Fighters

[RatPoison]

The primary weapon buff to Strikes would need to be very, very significant though. You say the Scout's advantage is maneuverability/engines, but in truth it's real advantage is in its offensive and defensive cooldowns.

 

The Strike has no slot available for an offensive cooldown, so it needs a rather significant perma-buff to Primary Weapons.

 

And yet one of the scouts advantage or necessities to its offensive ability is its maneuverability.

 

In my opinion, strikes don't need a significant boost to its primary weapons, it needs to have torpedoes reworked or a strike only component (or two) added in to increase the effectiveness of its missiles and torpedoes. I don't want strikes to become battlescouts where the best pilots close gaps and shred newbies with reworked weapons meant to be fired at longer ranges. Balancing strike primary weapons to match against the up close burst of scouts is not an exciting idea. Especially when it takes a bit more practice to fly a scout effectively and up close to non newbie opponents.

 

I'd much rather see strikes enjoy the benefit of a bigger frame with bigger engine and shield pools, better regen times on engines and shields, and for torpedoes especially to have their skill trees reworked or components added to help improve the odds of getting them off on pilots caught in the open. And on the wish list of things... to add in some additional utility components to help add variety to strike builds and develop them into hard counters to the current meta.

[CommanderKiko]

Maybe there could be a new component/secondary weapon strictly meant for strikers that has a max range of 12k fully upgraded, and a minimum range of 6k. That way, strikers wouldn't be as dependent on boost pools to close range, and in fact wouldn't want to due to making their own weapon ineffective? It would need a discussion in of itself to balance it, but it might actually be a solution, although not the best solution.

[buckman]

As a former flyboy, one thing that always underwhelmed me with the striker was its missles. I felt like they were extremely hurt by how easy it is for people to avoid them. If the strikes had a specific buff that made their missles lock on faster/100%.

 

I haven't played GSF for a while, and I understand that missles have been buffed across the board, so this may be a moot point.

[RiVaN_]

It has a counter... It's called a quads/pods scout... Please dont nerf gunships...

 

A gunship can 1 shot any and every other ship out there, it needs nerfed or other ships need to be changed to be able to seek and destroy gunships.

Plain and simple.

[tunewalker]

Ok going to say this, because I see these suggestions every where. I HATE suggestions that add damage or range or something as a Chasis Adjustment. If some one has a component on EVERY OTHER SHIP that component does the same through out every Chasis. Quads on EVERYTHING works the same way. So having Strikes be the only ship different in that respect to me is BAD.

 

If its a damage problem, then its a component problem fix the components that makes damage bad. If its a Range problem then either A its a component problem or B its an engine efficiency problem, fix those. If its an Accuracy problem... its a component problem fix the components.

 

Be it to strong defense or to strong offense. If it has to do with Accuracy or damage its a component problem. If it has to do with Range, its probably a mobility problem. If it has to do with Survival it could be either a component or a chasis Problem. But giving passive accuracy or damage or range to a chasis is BAD design.

[tommmsunb]

A gunship can 1 shot any and every other ship out there, it needs nerfed or other ships need to be changed to be able to seek and destroy gunships.

Plain and simple.

 

No it can't, it can only one-shot a scout or a strike on a crit. Gunships are weak as hell if you target them properly.

[tunewalker]

No it can't, it can only one-shot a scout or a strike on a crit. Gunships are weak as hell if you target them properly.

 

It can only 1 shot a strike with a crit IF its running quick charge.... MAYBE I dont even think that's entirely right, or if Directionals are faced the wrong way.. though technically it doesnt need a crit to kill a strike with Miss played Directionals. Maybe a Charged Plating strike.... but I dont think so, Pretty sure a crit is around 1200 damage to hull for Charged plating, base health on strikes is 1450

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[tommmsunb]

It can only 1 shot a strike with a crit IF its running quick charge.... MAYBE I dont even think that's entirely right, or if Directionals are faced the wrong way.. though technically it doesnt need a crit to kill a strike with Miss played Directionals. Maybe a Charged Plating strike.... but I dont think so, Pretty sure a crit is around 1200 damage to hull for Charged plating, base health on strikes is 1450

 

Yeah it definitely can't kill on a crit then, shields is something like that too and a railgun crit is something like 2250-2450, I forget because I haven't played in awhile.

[tunewalker]

Yeah it definitely can't kill on a crit then, shields is something like that too and a railgun crit is something like 2250-2450, I forget because I haven't played in awhile.

 

Crit is +50% or 2,400

[Nemarus]

Ok going to say this, because I see these suggestions every where. I HATE suggestions that add damage or range or something as a Chasis Adjustment. If some one has a component on EVERY OTHER SHIP that component does the same through out every Chasis. Quads on EVERYTHING works the same way. So having Strikes be the only ship different in that respect to me is BAD.

 

If its a damage problem, then its a component problem fix the components that makes damage bad. If its a Range problem then either A its a component problem or B its an engine efficiency problem, fix those. If its an Accuracy problem... its a component problem fix the components.

 

Be it to strong defense or to strong offense. If it has to do with Accuracy or damage its a component problem. If it has to do with Range, its probably a mobility problem. If it has to do with Survival it could be either a component or a chasis Problem. But giving passive accuracy or damage or range to a chasis is BAD design.

 

 

Then it is impossible to balance Strikes--because Strikes do not have any unique components except Ion Cannon, Repair Probes, and Remote Slicing. What's worse, most of the component combination the Strike can do (which might produce some unique result) is already possible on the Sledgehammer, which comes standard with a super useful mine or drone and super-mobile Power Dive.

 

Buff Rapids or LLC's? You've buffed half the game, including all the Scouts.

 

Buff Quads? Yay the Sting is even better.

 

Buff Clusters? More love for the Sting, and the Condor and Sledgehammer thank you for your support.

 

Buff Ion Missile? "This Spearpoint is now the ultimate power in the universe."

 

Buff EMP Missile? Yay Spearpoint again--and Condor too!

 

Buff HLC's, Proton Torpedoes, or Concussion Missiles? Yes that will help Strikes, but it also helps the Sledgehammer. And the Sledgehammer still threatens to be the better choice, due to mine/drone and Power Dive (not to mention more overall health points).

 

The only thing unique about the Strike chassis is that it's called "Strike". Its shield and hull are barely better than those on Gunships, it has the same engine efficiency as Gunships and Bombers, and it still turns much slower than a Scout. And apart from the three components above, all of its components can be found on other ships, often to be combined with unique class-specific components like mines, drones, railguns, BLC's, and Rocket Pods.

 

There is no way to buff Strikes through buffing individual components. Not without ripping those components off half the ships in the game. That probably is the best course, but it's too late for that now and--I suspect--beyond the scope of changes BioWare is willing to do.

 

Yes, the proposed "chassis fixes" are bad design, but in this case two wrongs are needed to make a right. Giving so many Strike-themed components away to Bombers and Gunships and Scouts was the original sin. That can't be undone now.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Nemarus

[CommanderKiko]

Gunships 1 hit nearly anything with DO. Valid point is valid. Doesn't make them OP because:

 

1:Gunships have a hard time hitting scouts, hence why scouts are the counter to gunships

2:Gunships can melee better than strikers due to BLC, but can't tank any damage (See also: "Squishy")

3:Gunships are weak as hell against anything that can actually hit them, which is basically everything, but then they just barrel roll away and reset engagement - Although they may not die, resetting an engagement can be more costly to their team than taking the death, depending on situation.

 

As thus, even strikers can have an advantage over gunships in the right situations, but scouts still do that job better. Spooking a GS with a Ptorp lock and a heavy hit from the flank is super fun in a striker, and is actually one of the few events that they are useful.

[Drakkolich]

A gunship can 1 shot any and every other ship out there, it needs nerfed or other ships need to be changed to be able to seek and destroy gunships.

Plain and simple.

 

A Gunship can do a maximum of 2400 Damage with one shot, it is a 16% chance critical hit with Slug Railgun.

 

Minimum health values on all Ships are as follows:

 

Blackbolt and Sting: 910 Shield + 950 Hull = 1860

Bloodmark: 1040 Shield + 950 Hull = 1990

Mangler and Jurgoran: 1360 Shield + 1250 Hull = 2610

Dustmaker: 1700 Shield + 1250 Hull = 2950

Rycer and Quell: 1260 Shield + 1450 Hull = 2710

Imperium: 1440 Shield + 1450 Hull = 2890

Razorwire and Legion: 1200 Shield + 2000 Hull = 3200

Decimus: 1500 Shield + 2000 Hull = 3500

 

These are the absolute minimum amounts of health you can have on one side of each ship. All these numbers are with no upgrades and without using crew to help bolster them. In no way can you get lower health totals then these.

 

As you can see only Scouts can be one shot by a Gunship and only on a 16% chance critical hit.

 

Incase anyone out there is interested here are the maximum totals of health each ship can get.

 

Blackbolt: 1755 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2895

Sting: 1820 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2960

Bloodmark: 1690 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2830

Mangler: 2210 Shield + 1500 Hull = 3710

Dustmaker and Jurgoran: 2380 Shield + 1250 Hull = 3630

Rycer: 3060 Shield + 1450 Hull = 4510

Quell: 2700 Shield + 1740 Hull = 4440

Imperium: 3060 Shield + 1740 Hull = 4800

Razorwire and Legion: 2925 Shield + 2400 Hull = 5325

Decimus: 2925 Shield + 2000 Hull = 4925

 

With proper upgrades if one wanted no ship in the game can be one shot by a Gunship ever, even the paper thin scouts. The Bombers can even take 2 full critical shots on the same arc and still survive.

[Nemarus]

A Gunship can do a maximum of 2400 Damage with one shot, it is a 16% chance critical hit with Slug Railgun.

 

Minimum health values on all Ships are as follows:

 

Blackbolt and Sting: 910 Shield + 950 Hull = 1860

Bloodmark: 1040 Shield + 950 Hull = 1990

Mangler and Jurgoran: 1360 Shield + 1250 Hull = 2610

Dustmaker: 1700 Shield + 1250 Hull = 2950

Rycer and Quell: 1260 Shield + 1450 Hull = 2710

Imperium: 1440 Shield + 1450 Hull = 2890

Razorwire and Legion: 1200 Shield + 2000 Hull = 3200

Decimus: 1500 Shield + 2000 Hull = 3500

 

These are the absolute minimum amounts of health you can have on one side of each ship. All these numbers are with no upgrades and without using crew to help bolster them. In no way can you get lower health totals then these.

 

As you can see only Scouts can be one shot by a Gunship and only on a 16% chance critical hit.

 

Incase anyone out there is interested here are the maximum totals of health each ship can get.

 

Blackbolt: 1755 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2895

Sting: 1820 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2960

Bloodmark: 1690 Shield + 1140 Hull = 2830

Mangler: 2210 Shield + 1500 Hull = 3710

Dustmaker and Jurgoran: 2380 Shield + 1250 Hull = 3630

Rycer: 3060 Shield + 1450 Hull = 4510

Quell: 2700 Shield + 1740 Hull = 4440

Imperium: 3060 Shield + 1740 Hull = 4800

Razorwire and Legion: 2925 Shield + 2400 Hull = 5325

Decimus: 2925 Shield + 2000 Hull = 4925

 

With proper upgrades if one wanted no ship in the game can be one shot by a Gunship ever, even the paper thin scouts. The Bombers can even take 2 full critical shots on the same arc and still survive.

 

Neat post--I'd never actually looked at it all-up before.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Nemarus

[tunewalker]

Then it is impossible to balance Strikes--because Strikes do not have any unique components except Ion Cannon, Repair Probes, and Remote Slicing. What's worse, most of the component combination the Strike can do (which might produce some unique result) is already possible on the Sledgehammer, which comes standard with a super useful mine or drone and super-mobile Power Dive.

 

Buff Rapids or LLC's? You've buffed half the game, including all the Scouts.

 

Buff Quads? Yay the Sting is even better.

 

Buff Clusters? More love for the Sting, and the Condor and Sledgehammer thank you for your support.

 

Buff Ion Missile? "This Spearpoint is now the ultimate power in the universe."

 

Buff EMP Missile? Yay Spearpoint again--and Condor too!

 

Buff HLC's, Proton Torpedoes, or Concussion Missiles? Yes that will help Strikes, but it also helps the Sledgehammer. And the Sledgehammer still threatens to be the better choice, due to mine/drone and Power Dive (not to mention more overall health points).

 

The only thing unique about the Strike chassis is that it's called "Strike". Its shield and hull are barely better than those on Gunships, it has the same engine efficiency as Gunships and Bombers, and it still turns much slower than a Scout. And apart from the three components above, all of its components can be found on other ships, often to be combined with unique class-specific components like mines, drones, railguns, BLC's, and Rocket Pods.

 

There is no way to buff Strikes through buffing individual components. Not without ripping those components off half the ships in the game. That probably is the best course, but it's too late for that now and--I suspect--beyond the scope of changes BioWare is willing to do.

 

Yes, the proposed "chassis fixes" are bad design, but in this case two wrongs are needed to make a right. Giving so many Strike-themed components away to Bombers and Gunships and Scouts was the original sin. That can't be undone now.

 

If you cant do it through buffs then nerfs MUST happen.

 

Rapids and Iights? what meta ship uses them, sure you buff half the ships but maybe they will be a strikes anti-scout weapon, and the other ships could be to slow to employ their short range... is that a Strike buff that doesnt do BAD chasis upgrades... YEP.

 

Buff Engine efficiency... that's not a "Bad design" that already exists on the scout...nothing wrong here.

 

Buff QCS.... well lets see what ship has the highest base Shields and the Highest base shield Regen? Strikes... so you think a shield based around those 2 things buffing it might buff... I dont know a Strike more then any other ship... sure 2 scouts have access to it, but it will never be as powerful on a scout as it is on a strike.

 

Nobodies asking for cluster buffs... buff Concs though... oh strikes... and what 2 bombers NONE of the ships other then strikes use them. if they did, would that be a bad thing, isnt that a deeper meta?

 

Look at the list I gave earlier nem, look at it hard... you know what you WONT see in it. a Bad chasis upgrade design. Would it buff strikes? absolutely. So "impossible" is a very strong word, and one that should not be thrown around so easily.

 

And if you HONESTLY think that you can not buff strikes enough to make them competitive WITH OUT giving them some form of "bad design" chasis buff that doesnt exist any where else in the game... well then hold onto your butts cus that's when mister nerf bat comes a swinging..

 

Oh and for those who think Nerfs arent fair to talk about... while I do not wish to see them, the last clause "what would make strikes competitive?" totally opens the door for nerf talk. If the ONLY way to get them there is to nerf something else.... that is on the table.

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[phalczen]

Ok going to say this, because I see these suggestions every where. I HATE suggestions that add damage or range or something as a Chasis Adjustment. If some one has a component on EVERY OTHER SHIP that component does the same through out every Chasis. Quads on EVERYTHING works the same way. So having Strikes be the only ship different in that respect to me is BAD.

 

If its a damage problem, then its a component problem fix the components that makes damage bad. If its a Range problem then either A its a component problem or B its an engine efficiency problem, fix those. If its an Accuracy problem... its a component problem fix the components.

 

Be it to strong defense or to strong offense. If it has to do with Accuracy or damage its a component problem. If it has to do with Range, its probably a mobility problem. If it has to do with Survival it could be either a component or a chasis Problem. But giving passive accuracy or damage or range to a chasis is BAD design.

 

But that isn't exactly true, because of Crew Passives.

 

I used to think exactly like you and was about to type something similar, until I tried to think of exceptions to the rule. As I started to list out the accuracy passive, the rapid reload passive, the evasion passive, I realized that almost every crew passive affects a component in some way. Change out your crew and the stats on the accuracy of your, say, BLCs change, or the reload time on your concussion missiles.

 

Why should the game code treat a passive on a Chassis differently than it treats a crew passive? From the perspective of the flight engine? All it really has to look at is the final result, and since you cannot change crew on demand in a match, it would be consistent and predictable.

[tunewalker]

But that isn't exactly true, because of Crew Passives.

 

I used to think exactly like you and was about to type something similar, until I tried to think of exceptions to the rule. As I started to list out the accuracy passive, the rapid reload passive, the evasion passive, I realized that almost every crew passive affects a component in some way. Change out your crew and the stats on the accuracy of your, say, BLCs change, or the reload time on your concussion missiles.

 

Why should the game code treat a passive on a Chassis differently than it treats a crew passive? From the perspective of the flight engine? All it really has to look at is the final result, and since you cannot change crew on demand in a match, it would be consistent and predictable.

 

They exist on Crew members... NOT on a chassis. And it has nothing to do with code, it has to do with Good game design and Bad game design. Making every component the same on every ship that has it, the only modifiers being upgrades and crew, and then changing that to where 1 ship and only that ship behaves differently is bad game design and Should NEVER be done for any reason.

 

I would rather strikes stay bottom of the barrel then see such terrible band aid game fix happen.

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[phalczen]

They exist on Crew members... NOT on a chassis. And it has nothing to do with code, it has to do with Good game design and Bad game design. Making every component the same on every ship that has it, the only modifiers being upgrades and crew, and then changing that to where 1 ship and only that ship behaves differently is bad game design and Should NEVER be done.

 

And I hear what you are saying, but components do work differently from ship to ship because people change out their crew members. Take Rapid Fire Lasers for example, a primary weapon available on the T1 strike and the T2 scout. In the T1 Strike I take Qyzen Fess or Jaesa Wilsaam for Field of View and Pinpointing. In the T2 Scout I take Kira Carsen or Lieutenant Pierce for Spare Ammo and Pinpointing. RFL behave differently in those two ships, but it is the same component.

 

Its not a dramatic difference, but if it wasn't meaningful then no one would feel any desire to use a crew member with Field of View.

 

EDIT: Or, Quick Charge Shield using Nadia, or using Doc. The shield clearly behaves differently depending on the crew and you've already acknowledged how it behaves differently on a scout versus a strike.

Edited June 1, 2015 by phalczen

[tunewalker]

And I hear what you are saying, but components do work differently from ship to ship because people change out their crew members. Take Rapid Fire Lasers for example, a primary weapon available on the T1 strike and the T2 scout. In the T1 Strike I take Qyzen Fess or Jaesa Wilsaam for Field of View and Pinpointing. In the T2 Scout I take Kira Carsen or Lieutenant Pierce for Spare Ammo and Pinpointing. RFL behave differently in those two ships, but it is the same component.

 

Its not a dramatic difference, but if it wasn't meaningful then no one would feel any desire to use a crew member with Field of View.

 

No they preform different with those COMPANIONS, has nothing to do with the ship. Put the same companions on both ships and they will be the exact same. Like I said, the only difference is modifiers on the upgrades or crew members that the player CHOSE or had access to. There is NOTHING on a chasis ANY WHERE that does this. It is pure 100% bad design and a bad idea to even suggest to do so.

[phalczen]

No they preform different with those COMPANIONS, has nothing to do with the ship. Put the same companions on both ships and they will be the exact same. Like I said, the only difference is modifiers on the upgrades or crew members that the player CHOSE or had access to. There is NOTHING on a chasis ANY WHERE that does this. It is pure 100% bad design and a bad idea to even suggest to do so.

 

But its not, see my edit above. If it was bad design why add modifiers to shield regen at all, which the strike had since launch?

 

I'm just saying the sky isn't falling if they have to add some passives to the chassis itself. There is clearly precedent and it is handled by the flight engine without trouble.

[phalczen]

A Gunship can do a maximum of 2400 Damage with one shot, it is a 16% chance critical hit with Slug Railgun.

 

(snipped)

 

As you can see only Scouts can be one shot by a Gunship and only on a 16% chance critical hit.

 

TY Drako for providing sanity in the face of emotion.

[tunewalker]

But its not, see my edit above. If it was bad design why add modifiers to shield regen at all, which the strike had since launch?

 

I'm just saying the sky isn't falling if they have to add some passives to the chassis itself. There is clearly precedent and it is handled by the flight engine without trouble.

 

Did you just say 2 different crew members? yes yes you did.... did the shield behave different because of a CREW MEMBER passive, and "Upgrade passive" that you Chose... yes yes it did... is there anything that changes that Chasis idea to good... no no there isnt.

 

You can argue that its different from scout to strike to which I would say yes... yes it is, but that's because ALL ships have different Base shields and base shield regen... if you want to touch those, feel free that is something that exists, but NO SHIP has a change in accuracy or damage from one to the other... only UPGRADES/ CREWMEMBERS do that no CHASIS does that and no chasis SHOULD do it.'

 

 

 

Edit: things that exist on ship Chasis

 

Engine efficiency (scouts have a different cost then all other ships)

Base Hull

Base Shield Strength

Base Shield Regen

Base Turning Speed

Base Movement Speed

 

(base means before upgrades)

 

Things that DONT exist on a ship chasis

Firing arcs.

Damage

Accuracy

Lock On times

Ammo

Range

Tracking penalties

 

So much more, all of these exists on the components that are on the ship.

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[phalczen]

Did you just say 2 different crew members? yes yes you did.... did the shield behave different because of a CREW MEMBER passive, and "Upgrade passive" that you Chose... yes yes it did... is there anything that changes that Chasis idea to good... no no there isnt.

 

You can argue that its different from scout to strike to which I would say yes... yes it is, but that's because ALL ships have different Base shields and base shield regen... if you want to touch those, feel free that is something that exists, but NO SHIP has a change in accuracy or damage from one to the other... only UPGRADES/ CREWMEMBERS do that no CHASIS does that and no chasis SHOULD do it.

 

I just fail to see why its acceptable design to have shield regen vary from ship class to ship class but not something like accuracy, simply on face value. Really, you couldn't imagine that the larger frame of a strike chassis allows for a larger targeting computer that supports tracking your current target and improves the accuracy of your weapons? Or the larger frame of a strike chassis allows for a sophisticated guidance system to be attached to your missiles such that their lock on times are reduced?

 

My point is that there is not only an easily conceivable LORE reason for the differences to exist, but that from the perspective of the flight engine it isn't a technical hurdle either, and we shouldn't discount solutions which modify the chassis merely out of hand. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this topic and move on.

 

EDIT: and I don't think we should put any limits on what the Devs can or cannot do, when they appear to be receptive to feedback on strike efficacy.

Edited June 1, 2015 by phalczen

[tunewalker]

I just fail to see why its acceptable design to have shield regen vary from ship class to ship class but not something like accuracy, simply on face value. Really, you couldn't imagine that the larger frame of a strike chassis allows for a larger targeting computer that supports tracking your current target and improves the accuracy of your weapons? Or the larger frame of a strike chassis allows for a sophisticated guidance system to be attached to your missiles such that their lock on times are reduced?

 

My point is that there is not only an easily conceivable LORE reason for the differences to exist, but that from the perspective of the flight engine it isn't a technical hurdle either, and we shouldn't discount solutions which modify the chassis merely out of hand. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this topic and move on.

 

EDIT: and I don't think we should put any limits on what the Devs can or cannot do, when they appear to be receptive to feedback on strike efficacy.

 

I just think if they DO SO, its bad game design and it IS bad game design. Its a crutch, its a "this was to hard to make components all balanced that we could stick with the stuff on components being on componets, and the stuff on chasis being chasis so here is some duct tape to our terrible terrible balancing skills enjoy"

 

 

 

Edit: people try to put limits on it already by saying "dont nerf xyz" I think its possible to do it with out nerfing and with out creating bad/ lazy game design. I dont pretend to envy the devs jobs in any way... they ahve one hell of a mess here.

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[tunewalker]

 

 

 

X= Strike fighter

Zero= Scout

Vile= Gunship

Sigma= Bomber

Edited June 1, 2015 by tunewalker

[Nemarus]

I just think if they DO SO, its bad game design and it IS bad game design. Its a crutch, its a "this was to hard to make components all balanced that we could stick with the stuff on components being on componets, and the stuff on chasis being chasis so here is some duct tape to our terrible terrible balancing skills enjoy"

 

But this is precisely the situation we are in. It took us (and to a large extent me harassing them) months to get devs to even acknowledge this forum exists.

 

They have previously said "GSF is in a good place". And to an extent, they are right.

 

Now they have solicited suggestions on Strikes. You may believe that they are willing to tear down the game and rebuild it so that Strikes have a role. You are free to voice that opinion. You may even put your own notions of design elegance ahead of GSF health, by saying you'd rather have Strikes remain worthless than see any chassis stat which affects weapons components (after all, we already have three which affect Shield component performance).

 

And the programmer in me would agree with you. Precedent in design is important to maintain in an ideal situation.

 

But most of us do not believe this is an ideal situation. We believe this is one dev (maybe two) trying to squeeze in a narrow fix to help a niche community feel appreciated, and perhaps to help that niche community grow.

 

And perhaps, if this small investment results in growth of the GSF population, BioWare will be motivated to do a more comprehensive balance pass.

 

But you know what will not grow the population? Tearing down everyone's sacred cow builds and playstyles, breaking apart what healthy meta does exist, and then throwing an entirely new meta into being and hoping it sticks.

 

Neither will GSF survive if nothing is done, even if for the noble purpose of maintaining elegant design.

 

Giving Strikes a powerful offensive buff immediately makes them more accessible for new pilots who can barely point and shoot. Even if they get farmed, they will still have a means to get the odd, lucky kill. That is why so many pilots flock to Gunships and Bombers--because you don't have to be experienced to be *functional*.

 

I suspect that no matter how Strikes are buffed, they still will not show up much in Super Serious. But at least, in a casual match, a team of new pilots in Rycers will present some level of threat through firepower alone.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Nemarus