Let's talk about Strike Fighters

[Verain]

Actually can we take this back and forth out of the Main Dev Feedback thread please? It's a fine discussion for its own thread, but this thread has enough off-topic clutter as it is.

 

If the mods want to leave a guy in who posts page long screeds with literally zero correct points stated as facts, then they must want him to be corrected. Both barrels so that no one reading thinks there's a word of truth to this crap.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Verain

[Drakkolich]

Alright I said in a previous post I would get some videos to prove some stuff Clcooper was incorrect about.

 

First off I made a video to address if you can get from A to C in a single boost without stopping.

I made a specific build to get the best chance at making this happen, the results surprised even me!

 

The build I used for this test is as follows. (I'm only mentioning components that affect engine pool, speed or engine regeneration)

- Booster Recharge (Extra regeneration T4, Instant engine power T5)

- Shield Power Converter (Extra engine power)

- Power Dive (Extra speed)

- Regeneration Thrusters

 

 

Next I made 2 videos showing myself playing a Stock Quarrel and a Stock Novadive. Just to show you can hit things even in a Stock ship. I even talk while playing explaining why I miss certain shots.

 

 

 

As an added bonus I had time in the Novadive game to check how far a Stock NovaDive can go in a single boost.

 

Enjoy the Videos!

 

Actually can we take this back and forth out of the Main Dev Feedback thread please? It's a fine discussion for its own thread, but this thread has enough off-topic clutter as it is.

 

I know we aren't directly talking about Strike buffs Nemarus but I still feel it's on topic.

I feel this way because Clcooper came in with a bunch of suggestion to the game, however they were on false information. The discussion we are having is helping him see which information was false (hopefully), thus allowing him to revise what he would to like to see in the form of Strike buffs.

 

I think everyone should be aloud to express their opinions, however if I see that someone is using false information I like to help them see there errors so they can revise them. Just to clarify I'd never post anything about an opinion being false, I'm just helping correct facts that players use to make their points.

A great example is when Tunewalker said he couldn't remember any buffs ever happening in GSF, my only post to that was showing the buffs that have happened.

 

I really hope this line of thinking makes sense to you too after my explanation.

[Nemarus]

If the mods want to leave a guy in who posts page long screeds with literally zero correct points stated as facts, then they must want him to be corrected. Both barrels so that no one reading thinks there's a word of truth to this crap.

 

The thread is 40 pages long, full of walls of text. Had the offending post been quietly ignored, it would be lost amongst so much noise.

 

But by quoting and replying to it, you just invite further false information, which was subsequently quoted. On and on it goes. What once was a single dumb post has now lived on for several pages.

 

Besides, you really think the devs don't know that Imperial ships and Republic ships go the same speed? Are you worried one post in 40 pages, from someone who obviously has no idea how the game works, is going to unduly influence the devs?

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Not every forum post is an invitation to battle. Not every reply has to win a victory or score a point. And the easiest way to erase an ignorant post is to ignore it. It's almost like those words have some kind of common root.

 

But no. Instead, every time some newb comes in here spewing nonsense, instead of just letting it fall below the fold of the front page, we keep bumping it over and over again.

[Verain]

The devs obv won't be confused by his stuff. The fact that players are coming in on the dev tracker means that some players might.

[clcooper]

burst laser cannon

condor WPD 20.8 ROF 80 500m 1008 ??m 625 ??m 514 lv 0

quarrel WPD 20,0 ROF 80 500m 833 ??m 625 ??m ?? lv 0

the last time I was in school these numbers are all not the same . but they are the same gun same level of no upgrade . but a different ship .

 

laser cannon

nova WPD 19 ROF 150 500m 791 ??m 735 ??m 550 lv ??

war carrier WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 897 ??m 833 ??m 635 lv 3

condor WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 903 ??m 897 ??m 683 lv 3

 

light laser cannon

 

war carrier WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 995 ??m 770 ??m 624 lv ?

condor WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 1053 ??m 832 ??m 674 lv ?

nova WPD 21 ROF 180 500m ??m ??m lv 0

quarrel WPD 20.4 ROF 194 500m 1108 ??m 873 ??m 708 lv 4

 

as you can see the numbers are NOT the same . and some that are upgraded are different as the same level upgrades . and better then a higher level upgrade.

and if you need I will go back and find what should be where the ?? are . the stats if not there are the same .

 

so if I have numbers like this but you don't . would that mean there is a problem with the game . my numbers should be the same as your numbers at the same level with the same upgrades with the same crew member . and I am telling it is not .

[clcooper]

I have every possible upgrade on every possible ship. That is, I have all Republic ships, and all Empire ships, with every single possible thing unlocked on each and every single one of them.

 

What you are saying is just one more thing you don't know what you are talking about.

 

Nothing you say is close to true.

 

Imperial ships are not faster, nor more durable, nor more accurate (in fact, empire's default starting offensive crewman, MZ-12, doesn't have accuracy bonus- you have to unlock it).

 

Drako also plays both factions on many servers, as you can see from his youtubes, twitch channels, screenshots, forum commentary, etc.

 

yep you are comparing a upgraded to upgraded and that is not what I said now is it .

now follow along I am only going to say this one more time .

 

when I boast my upgraded Republic ship . I run out of engine power before I get to the sat . but my imperial ship un upgraded .boast does not run out until I get under the sat . both using the engine boast . and all the crew are for accuracy ,. I am a lair and I am just dreaming this stuff up . because your fully upgraded and with the right crew members don't do that .

 

you all are talking about your fully upgraded ships . I am telling you why the new people don't stay . and why .

 

I am telling you that as a new player . the problems I have seen and have . if any of you get in any game and fire onto someone many times and do no damage . but they fire on you and in 2 or 3 shots you are dead . none of you would stay either .

 

I wonder why in the Gree event the two missions in the pvp area not to many do them ..GSF is getting the same way .if you don't know why go ask them why .

[CommanderKiko]

As a republic player who plays imp occasionally, and plays stock alts fairly often, I can say with certainty that there is zero difference between imp and pub outside of look and map layout. Neither of which provide either side a distinct advantage outside of cover options - which matter mostly when playing defense in TDM as imps on lost, and trying to assault A on lost in dom. Neither side has a clear advantage nor a clear tactical advantage, and stats shouldn't (and don't) vary at all side-to-side. A t1 gunship is still a t1 gunship. T2 scout is still a t2 scout. Ect.

 

Such bias does not exist, it simply just doesn't. This off topic emotional rant is utterly moot.

[clcooper]

Wow ok If you want to be that picky I'll make a video showing you exactly what you ask for. I should be able to get it ready for you later tonight.

 

Next time you check your weapons for the same stats make sure both ships are using the exact same crew members. Crew passives affect weapon power draw as well as accuracy.

In the offensive crew members passives there is one called "pinpointing" it adds 6% accuracy to your primary weapons. Most likely this is the 6% difference you are seeing between both ships.

 

In the Engineering crew members passives there is one called "Efficient Fire" it makes your weapon draw 13% less power. This might be one of the causes of difference you are seeing on both ships.

 

You also have to make sure the capacitors are the same on both ships, as they also affect weapon stats.

For example if one ship has frequency capacitor (15% Faster primary weapon firing rate) will have 15% more weapon draw on it's weapon's stats.

 

Next time you see difference between different primaries make sure your crew and capacitors are the same on both ships. Then you will see that weapons from one ship to another are exactly the same.

 

I'm not calling you a liar, I'm saying you haven't presented any evidence at all to support any of your stories or theories.

 

The only thing that could cause this would be the other players in the games. It sounds like your server is just very poorly balanced factions wise and you fight easier players while on the Imperial side.

 

To help us out, could you tell us what Server you play on? And if you don't mind a screenshot of the stats of your 2 different characters would go a long way to explaining some of the things you are describing.

 

and after that video how many kills did you have . was it more then 20 .

 

yes I have only been in a 2 GSF matches . and only seen what I am saying happen one time . I just wonder how long and how many matches a player has to do too have 4 toons with almost fully upgraded ships . and 4 toons which are not upgraded have from 20,000 to 50,000 saved up .

so when he says that he does better in his UN upgraded ships then he does in his upgraded ships . it must be his skill changes from one side to the other .he is standing on his head to hit all the crtl shift and f keys . it must be the others he is play against are not that good . when with his UN upgraded ship can and has shot down .the aces from the other side with more ease then with his upgraded ships.

he must be a nooby

it should not make any difference how many matches, what type of gun ,upgrades. or crew member . if a player holds their sights on another ship and fire until they can no longer fire . they should of had more then 0 hits . during that time .. . so if they get the right crew that gives the 6% more accuracy how many more hit should they got .

 

using this as a example .

if a GS shoots a scout fully charged 5 times and does no damage at all . how many of those shots should of done some sort of damage. now use accuracy in those 5 shots how many should done damage . the scout can have any lv of evasion you what . how many shots shot of hit and did damage . and how much damage should of been done

[Devrius]

yep you are comparing a upgraded to upgraded and that is not what I said now is it .

now follow along I am only going to say this one more time .

 

when I boast my upgraded Republic ship . I run out of engine power before I get to the sat . but my imperial ship un upgraded .boast does not run out until I get under the sat . both using the engine boast . and all the crew are for accuracy ,. I am a lair and I am just dreaming this stuff up . because your fully upgraded and with the right crew members don't do that .

 

you all are talking about your fully upgraded ships . I am telling you why the new people don't stay . and why .

 

I am telling you that as a new player . the problems I have seen and have . if any of you get in any game and fire onto someone many times and do no damage . but they fire on you and in 2 or 3 shots you are dead . none of you would stay either .

 

I wonder why in the Gree event the two missions in the pvp area not to many do them ..GSF is getting the same way .if you don't know why go ask them why .

 

... You have no idea how to build a ship or how GSF work do you? There are many reasons why shooting at someone until you're empty will result in 0 damage, be it evasion, wrong range, wrong angle, wrong weapons, wrong timing (enemy has DF up) and so on, Hell I have found out that many new players try to aim not with their reticule but with their navigation cross airs...

 

The fact you claim "and all the crew are for accuracy" when only the copilot can give any accuracy proves this.

 

You further compare the same weapons on different ships and expect the same stats, which is impossible seeing how they have different components available to them.

 

Here, read the sticked guide: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=729222

 

Play a few dozen matches after you have read and learned what's in it then come back to the forums to talk about the unbalance between factions, but not here this a thread where buffing Strike Fighters is the point and having a minimum understanding of the game is necessary.

[Ardaneb]

yes I have only been in a 2 GSF matches . and only seen what I am saying happen one time .

 

I think this should be in its own thread. You should really start one. I think we can all agree it is a little off topic (scout speed in a strike suggestion thread).

[clcooper]

As a republic player who plays imp occasionally, and plays stock alts fairly often, I can say with certainty that there is zero difference between imp and pub outside of look and map layout. Neither of which provide either side a distinct advantage outside of cover options - which matter mostly when playing defense in TDM as imps on lost, and trying to assault A on lost in dom. Neither side has a clear advantage nor a clear tactical advantage, and stats shouldn't (and don't) vary at all side-to-side. A t1 gunship is still a t1 gunship. T2 scout is still a t2 scout. Ect.

 

Such bias does not exist, it simply just doesn't. This off topic emotional rant is utterly moot.

 

yep I must be dreaming up what I say .I haven't never flew the other ship really I was just dreaming I was . I never went back to the other ship to make sure . no the one side I don't have up to 50,000 reps saved up . I just don't know what I am talking about .

and I forgot a 6% should make so much difference .

 

yep I will just shut up and let Larry Curly and Moe . run the show . because they have done great so far that is why GSF is so full of new players now. why any time of the day you get right in a GSF match there is no wait times . over 10min. it is full of players wanting to play . and they all keep coming back .

 

now who is the one dreaming .

 

I guess the strike is the only thing that needs fixed to bring the new players in . and to keep them . like I said the keyboard top ace wont like what I have to say and I was right .

 

and if you would take time and read what I one or two other not top aces have said is the same as what I have said . but since we are not the top forum aces what we say doesn't matter . and when like me says hey did you hear what I said . I am told that I am a liar I am not seeing what I am seeing .

 

the difference between you and me with GSF is I care about every level of player and want to see more new players come and stay . you only care as long as you are on top and can have the highest kill count then anybody else and don't want that to change . there was a thread that said screw GSF he wasn't going to play any more . you didn't listen to him then . you told him to stay around just so you can keep your kill count up .

Edited June 5, 2015 by clcooper

[clcooper]

 

I know we aren't directly talking about Strike buffs Nemarus but I still feel it's on topic.

I feel this way because Clcooper came in with a bunch of suggestion to the game, however they were on false information. The discussion we are having is helping him see which information was false (hopefully), thus allowing him to revise what he would to like to see in the form of Strike buffs.

 

I think everyone should be aloud to express their opinions, however if I see that someone is using false information I like to help them see there errors so they can revise them. Just to clarify I'd never post anything about an opinion being false, I'm just helping correct facts that players use to make their points.

A great example is when Tunewalker said he couldn't remember any buffs ever happening in GSF, my only post to that was showing the buffs that have happened.

 

I really hope this line of thinking makes sense to you too after my explanation.

thank you

as for the false information I never gave or will give false information . because I have tried . watched , changed crew members . got upgrades. and that is why I have no upgraded ships with up to 50,000 reps waiting to use . I agree I may not have the best component or the crew but even if one of them is off . the % they give should not be making as much of a difference as it does in the game that I see it . . some what ever's give a 6% bonus . but in the game I see it making a 50% bonus .

 

if you want new players to join and stay don't you think you should listen to the new players also not just all the old players .

 

same as with other ships . if the gunships say don't change the strike that they are already to hard to kill . should you change the strikes anyways

 

you don't want a flight simulator game but you want it balanced . and how do you do that . by putting more fairy tale make believe stuff in the game . where one ship will always be the better choice until the next buff or what ever you call it comes out and then that ship will be the only ship worth flying . or do you want it so all ship can fly .

[CommanderKiko]

I've actually been bringing new players into the game, listening to what they have told me, and in this thread have been advocating on their behalf. What have you been doing? Imagining an imbalance between the factions and insulting people while taking the thread exceedingly far off topic.

 

To say there is an imbalance between, say, the engine pool of an imp type 1 striker and a pub type 1 striker is just not true. They are both type 1's. They have exactly the same (read, copy-paste) stats. They have been tested heavily, constantly, and consistently. Your argument is way off the mark. It's like saying snipers are OP and need nerfed, but slingers aren't OP and don't need any stat changes.

 

Edit: Drak is right, you are entitled to your opinion. I still feel that this is off topic because it seems like you are comparing imp to pub for the exact same ship. Maybe I'm just misreading what you said, but that is what I'm picking up on.

Edited June 5, 2015 by CommanderKiko

[Verain]

yep I must be dreaming up what I say

 

Correct. What you are saying in many cases is demonstrably untrue. Not only can we check in game, but we have started several fresh characters on both factions across most servers, and mastered ships on some of them. Many of your claims are contrary to:

> Experiences of multiple players with thousands of games.

> The in game documentation.

> The stated goals of the devs.

> The datamined statistics straight outta the binary.

 

On the other hand, we have "guy who argues and insults with no evidence on his side, and has only ever posted in the one thread with a dev post".

 

.I haven't never flew the other ship really I was just dreaming I was

 

So, this may come as a surprise, but people have biases that lead them to come to the wrong conclusions. Usually, these people will claim that they don't have them.

 

 

I don't know if you are lying. Or trolling. You could well be either. Drako will be polite, because he wants you to play the game and have fun. I just want to stop putting crap in a thread with high visibility. You don't understand the game, and the whole forums will help you dot that if you ask nicely. The things you think you experienced, you did not. Think that's crazy? If you seriously think that, then you will:

1)- Document. This absolutely includes videos. Video yourself, showing us what you are queueing with (crewmembers, all upgrades), and flying. The whole thing, put it on youtube. Make sure it's high enough resolution that we can read the damage numbers when you shoot.

2)- Find out the tech details that are available, and try to figure out what is wrong. If you think the game isn't performing as documented, do that stuff.

 

You aren't "dreaming". You don't know how to parse your own experiences in GSF, because you don't understand GSF. You are probably confused. You are maybe lying. But you are just super damned wrong. Get your poop in a group before you post again.

 

 

I guess the strike is the only thing that needs fixed to bring the new players in

 

New content would bring players in. This is a post about fixing the strike fighter, an undertuned ship class that would require very little dev time to fix compared to say:

> Writing a whole new tutorial

> Getting cross server for just GSF (important, hard), or all of SWTOR (very important, a little harder)

> Adding a pve mode

 

Sure, those things would help, but the thread is how to fix strikes. You can be angry because a dev isn't doing what you want (a complete redesign), but you SHOULD be happy that they are addressing game balance.

 

The fact is, gunships, scouts, and bombers all see high level play. All are good at their jobs, and all work together. Strikes are mostly left out, and if we can get that fixed- which, I can't stress enough, is both the name of the thread and the stated dev intentions- then that will help the game.

 

Being insulted that the devs aren't fixing the things YOU want fixed (even though they in many cases aren't broken because you don't understand what you are seeing, and in other cases would be really expensive changes) is ludicrous. We wanna fix strikes, the devs are looking into it, and you are just a poison rash.

 

but since we are not the top forum aces what we say doesn't matter

 

You use "forum" and "keyboard" as if everyone talking here doesn't have thousands of games under their belt. We actually play GSF, and we see each other in game pretty often, on many servers- even the Euro servers, and this isn't the Euro forums. If you don't recognize many of the thread participants from in game, I can only assume you haven't played many games, or on many servers. Certainly if you think the empire and republic ships are different we already knew that, but it's funny how hard you are projecting here.

 

you only care as long as you are on top and can have the highest kill count then anybody else and don't want that to change

 

Uh, we like the game, sure. But why would we spend all this time talking about balance if we just wanted to farm hard? We already farm hard. We can do that in the existing meta ships. We want the meta to be broader. That's because we like the game, and want it to be better. More baseless claims from your haterade supplier.

 

. there was a thread that said screw GSF he wasn't going to play any more . you didn't listen to him then . you told him to stay around just so you can keep your kill count up .

 

We told him to get better, and explained how. He understood that, and is probably a better GSF pilot right now. He came here frustrated and left having learned stuff. What should we have said? "Oh, this guy who doesn't understand anything about the game is confused. I guess we should all get behind him, and ask for huge expensive redesigns to a game that works great, just because some rando does not, after a few games, understand enough to be having a good time."

 

Gimme a break.

[Verain]

tif you want new players to join and stay don't you think you should listen to the new players also not just all the old players .

 

Not really, no. The few new player posts we get are broadly "how do I" (and we wrote a bunch of guides, and point them there) and "waaah" (and we explain why, stop crying). Players are only new for a brief amount of time. It would be nice to keep more new players, but this is an arcade flight sim wrapped in a wow-style MMO. A new player coming in with ideas based on literal false information doesn't deserve consideration. If everyone walked in with the same problems, we would probably address that (ex: a lot of players think it's all about gear, so we can point to good players ripping face with no gear). But instead, it's just random misunderstandings, based on fly-by-night posters who never contribute or understand, and just post a bunch of badly informed complaints.

 

No, the game should not be built around them. No, that's not how to get new players to stay. No, it has no merit to consider that.

 

where one ship will always be the better choice until the next buff or what ever you call it comes out and then that ship will be the only ship worth flying . or do you want it so all ship can fly .

 

This is silly. You are saying things you've seen in other games. GSF has never had this. We've hardly had any balance changes, and they have been minor. In fact, we all want strikes fixed. Right now, you can fly three of four ship types competitively. We want the first. There's no "one best ship" right now. Buffing strike fighters is exactly what is needed so that more ships show up in the meta. That's the point of this thread.

[Drakkolich]

burst laser cannon

condor WPD 20.8 ROF 80 500m 1008 ??m 625 ??m 514 lv 0

quarrel WPD 20,0 ROF 80 500m 833 ??m 625 ??m ?? lv 0

the last time I was in school these numbers are all not the same . but they are the same gun same level of no upgrade . but a different ship .

 

laser cannon

nova WPD 19 ROF 150 500m 791 ??m 735 ??m 550 lv ??

war carrier WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 897 ??m 833 ??m 635 lv 3

condor WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 903 ??m 897 ??m 683 lv 3

 

light laser cannon

 

war carrier WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 995 ??m 770 ??m 624 lv ?

condor WPD 20.5 ROF 162 500m 1053 ??m 832 ??m 674 lv ?

nova WPD 21 ROF 180 500m ??m ??m lv 0

quarrel WPD 20.4 ROF 194 500m 1108 ??m 873 ??m 708 lv 4

 

as you can see the numbers are NOT the same . and some that are upgraded are different as the same level upgrades . and better then a higher level upgrade.

and if you need I will go back and find what should be where the ?? are . the stats if not there are the same .

 

so if I have numbers like this but you don't . would that mean there is a problem with the game . my numbers should be the same as your numbers at the same level with the same upgrades with the same crew member . and I am telling it is not .

 

I'm really really happy you posted these numbers this tells me exactly why you are confused. It's clearly the capacitors that are messing you up.

 

To this end I have once again made you a short video showing how weapons can change from ship to ship even if they have the same upgrades.

 

 

There is nothing wrong with your game, you just aren't using the same capacitors on different ships. The capacitor minor components affect your weapon stats.

[tunewalker]

Speaking of "on-topic" thing, this is more a "wall of crazy" kind of thing, but hey thoughts and ideas, are thoughts and Ideas.

 

 

Obviously being a "wall of crazy" this has nothing to do with my past stuff.

 

 

Ok so the idea is a "duel ammo" system for missiles. Essentially there is a max ammo (what we have now) and there is a "in the chamber" ammo, where you can have more then 1 (say 2 for protons, 3 for Concs and 4 for clusters just fo an example) missile loaded at a time, once you fire the first missile you begin reloading according to the reload timer until the max "in chamber" ammo capacity is reached again. This would make reload timers still relevant while ALSO allowing for burst missile usage.

 

Along SIDE this particular wall of crazy is if your missiles locked on the in range target automatically and the tone just went off when it was complete then you could right click for the number of missiles you wanted to fire. Obviously with this way the "you are being locked" warning tone would go away instead only having a "missile is in the air" tone when it is fired kind of like Missile sentry drones and seeker mines. This way again you can control the burst, you could fire one missile and watch them break to immediately start relocking, then fire another watch the break relock and then fire what ever missiles are left in the chamber for massive burst damage. Though missile damages and the like might have to be looked at with this system.

 

 

ANOTHER part of this wall of crazy, is maybe you would lock on a max number of targets at a time, IE you dont actually have to target any one but you big locking on everyone in your arc that is in range, and then right click and the missiles are fired at ALL targets. Now obviously this one has downsides when it comes to bursting one target and the reloads could really hurt this one, but that's why its a wall of crazy.

[tunewalker]

I'm really really happy you posted these numbers this tells me exactly why you are confused. It's clearly the capacitors that are messing you up.

 

To this end I have once again made you a short video showing how weapons can change from ship to ship even if they have the same upgrades.

 

 

There is nothing wrong with your game, you just aren't using the same capacitors on different ships. The capacitor minor components affect your weapon stats.

 

 

To add to drak's weapon explination and Cooper YOUR engine efficiency issue from stock ships on one side to upgraded ships on the other side. The easy explination is Quick Charge shields. I am almost certain your upgraded ship (if its a strike) is using Directionals, while your Stock strike is automatically equiped with Quick Charge shields.

 

 

Quick charge shield Stats.

 

Shield Max Power (capacity) -30%

Power Shield Regen Rate +45%

Power engine Regen rate (when recently consumed) +45%

 

That last one makes a HUGE difference in engine efficiency and boost length. There is no delay for Recently consumed, the regen delay is between Recently consumed regen to full Regen. As such the Recently consumed Regen rate which is affected by quick charge shields is always on even while boosting. You are seeing more energy in engines on a stock ship because the stock ship starts with a shield that gives you that energy while usually the first thing any one does is get rid of that shield for directionals or charged plating sacrificing engine efficiency and regen for beefier shields.

 

 

 

Edit: The first thing every new pilot must learn, is they likely dont know anything. The next is when a veteran pilot tells you that you are wrong and is trying to help, believe them, they have a lot more games as well as a lot more time spent in both Stock ships and mastered ships and they have a lot more time spent tweaking out every little component of thier ship to Min/Max the best ship for them, many know component stats with out even having to look at them, and they have tried and looked at probably everything you have tried and looked at + 10x more. Yes you are wrong, its not your fault, the information is just not always clearly presented, dont get angry at it, its there, but its easy to miss.

 

 

By the way if you are hung up on the fact that draks ships were all fully upgraded then the easy explination between Quarrel and Condor is REALLY easy.... 1 has a capacitor, the other doesnt... Thus they will have different stats even if not upgraded. Cus a unupgraded capacitor still does something.

 

 

Edit 2: this does show another issue though, technically Cooper doesnt have false information, rather his problem is entirely understanding the information presented to him. Be it Accuracy vs Evasion, or how minor components or crew members or upgrades affect a ships stats or a ships weapons stats. As we can see we have a new player that's clearly been confused by all the information the game is feeding him, and such an information overload is messing with his entire perception of the game, be it game balance, faction balance, or ship balance he is just unable to proccess all the information that the game is trying to give him. He thinks imp is, on average, more accurate stock, when the stats and the facts are Republic is, all because Imps on his server stack evasion and Republic does not. I dont even know how often, if ever, he uses wingman on Imp side as that could result in 14% more accuracy for 20 seconds every minute. Or if he is near allies that are doing the same this could be 14% more accuracy for most of the game. In addition to opponents having potentially 30% less evasion and that's easily the "50% more accurate" (which is likely hyperbole to begin with) thing right there especially if he is dealing with smaller tracking penalties most of the time do to less skilled republic pilots, but again the games intel isnt arranged in a way for him to understand that even though that is what's going on, though this thread again has nothing to do with that since this is devs asking about strikes because of their lack of competitive play.

Edited June 6, 2015 by tunewalker

[Verain]

Actually, now that he's posting his stuff, this will resolve nicely.

 

Here's some more details on this:

 

1)- All ships of a type have identical possible upgrades.

2)- Each class of ship (strike, scout, gunship, bomber) has a set of base abilities. These are modified by whatever is on them.

3)- Each TYPE of ship (type 1 scout, type 3 bomber, etc) has a certain set of possible components. This list determines that ship's capabilities.

4)- Each COMPONENT has a different set of choices.

 

For instance, if you look at burst laser cannon on a Quarrel, it will be different than burst laser cannon on a Condor. This difference is due entirely to the fact that the Condor has a capacitor component increasing its range, damage, or rate of fire, and the Quarrel doesn't get this Capacitor component.

 

Different component types- for instance, quick charge versus directionals as pointed out- have different effects, stated when you look at them. Quick charge reduces your maximum shielding, but increases your rate of shield regeneration, as well as your booster regeneration while boosting (takes you a bit longer to run out of juice).

 

 

Each ship has crewmembers. The crewmembers modify several components. For each of the four slots (offensive, defensive, engineering, sensors) there are four possible upgrades, of which each crewmember has exactly two. Whatever crew passives you want, some set of crewmembers can get you EXACTLY that set of passives.

 

The copilot grants you an active, and that's chosen from your four crewmembers. You can always find exactly the copilot ability you want too.

 

The factional difference is this: if you choose exactly what passives you want, you may not have your copilot ability of choice available on one faction, but you could have it on another.

 

Example: If you want Bypass, on Republic you have a couple good crewmembers that give you this. They are "good" because they have passives you want. On Empire, you are forced to give up the "accuracy" passive to get Bypass- and this passive is very good indeed.

In practice, this barely matters- the sensor crewmembers on both sides have passives that don't matter much, and have very excellent actives (running interference and the general top choice wingman). This means that these crewmembers are selected for their actives, and the others for their passives, in most cases.

[CommanderKiko]

I'm glad that this misunderstanding came to a peaceable resolution so that we could get back on topic, but at the same time I feel we have covered a lot already.

 

We all agree that a major first step to fixing strike fighters isn't fixing strike fighters, but rather fixing the tool tips and already broken weapons (such as RFL.) We also feel that the strike fighters don't need to be made exceedingly OP in order to be competitive, but rather the basic abilities they have need buffed so as to not be utterly useless. We can agree, to some extent, that strike fighters need to logically be able to out-preform every specialized ship outside of it's specialized role - but not out preform them at what they are good at. We came up with countless walls of text as to our personal ideas of how to achieve this. We also in general feel as if though the strike fighters secondaries need some amount of resistance to lock-breaks, and there are several ways to achieve this.

 

I'm sure no one would complain if more ideas were brought up, but as there are already over 40 pages here for the devs to look through add external links, this is going to be some intense light reading already.

[Armonddd]

One of my favorite builds in the game is a Starguard with ion/HLC/clusters. I feel like that build has a perfectly appropriate time to kill that rewards player skill well and makes component choice significant.

 

Specifically, a skilled player will take frequency capacitor and switch from ions to HLCs after exactly as many shots are needed to remove shields; an unskilled player will be less efficient about swapping and will deal less damage (because their ions will hit hulls) and is probably better off with range or damage capacitor. On the other hand, the choice between barrel roll and retro thrusters represents a choice in playstyle: you care about being mobile versus you care about jousting. Directional shields versus quick-charge shields makes for a similar choice. Overall, this build is defined by its weapons and has a lot of variety everywhere else.

 

Unfortunately, this build has a lot of weaknesses. Here's some for this build in particular and strikes in general:

 

1. Ion cannon range is wonky. In a build where my weapon ranges are 6.3 km, 5 km, 4 km, my opener weapon's range is a huge limitation on my effectiveness. This is also related to my mobility... but getting from 6.3 km to 4 km is less of an issue than getting from 10 km to 6.3 km against an evasive target, or getting from B to C before C is captured.
   
2. Rapid-fire lasers are very weak. New players need to suffer through having the worst weapon in the game in a game where weapon choice is critical. On a related note, the strike has no good weapon to deal hull damage at close range. Buff anything about these guys except their power draw. (I think buffing RFLs is a better idea than giving strikes BLCs.)
   
3. Missiles are hard to hit with. The standard lock-on times are 4s for torpedoes, 3s for missiles, 1.5s for clusters, and only clusters are really viable because of it. Changing that to 3.5s for torpedoes, 2.5s for missiles, and (maybe!) 1.7s for clusters would do the game a lot of good (but even then, I've gotten kills with lasers against full shields and hull before the missile hit). Reducing the cooldown of various missiles and torpedoes would also be a huge help; there's no real reason for reload times longer than 3s, maybe 5s for torpedoes.
   
4. The Clarion/Imperium doesn't pack much punch. Repair probes are a neat trick for support, but mobile repair probes are lacking compared to stationary repair drones. Giving the Clarion/Imperium heavy laser cannons would put it more in line with the original vision of "heavy support platform that swats at enemies".
   
5. EMP and ion missiles are useless. EMP missile is not an appropriate answer to a nest of mines or drones because its range is short and the lock time is long, meaning you're practically required to fullstop to get the lock unless you want to move in range of the stuff you're trying to destroy (at which point you're open season). Ion missile simply fails at removing shields in a timely manner; when it hits, your lasers will have already removed shields.
   
6. Strikes have massive mobility problems. Their engine efficiency (afterburner activation cost and afterburner consumption rate) should both be reduced to match scouts. The scout's superior turning and engine speed will keep the two classes distinct. Even this might not be enough, given how some strike builds need to get within 5 km or less with low tracking penalty to be effective.
   
7. Strikes have issues with missiles. The exception is the Clarion/Imperium, which has access to power dive. The other strikes should also have access to power dive. This would again improve the strike's nearly nonexistant mobility.
   
8. Quick-charge shields are very dangerous to use. In a game where railguns exist, sacrificing 30% of your shield capacity is deadly (both for strikes and scouts). Simply removing that drawback would possibly make quick-charge shields a viable component.
   
9. Charged plating is a huge trap on the Starguard/Rycer. It could stand to have an armor component instead of a magazine. (This would also help strikes feel more tanky in general, which is a good thing.)
   

 

In essence, playing a strike is like playing a scout but being bad. Maybe strikes were intended to be the "handicap" that skilled players would use against unskilled opponents... but given how much fuss I've gotten for running a Clarion with QLCs and thermites (neither of which I can use anywhere near effectively), I don't think things worked out on that front.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Armonddd

[Ardaneb]

Charged plating is a huge trap on the Starguard/Rycer.

 

What would people think about increasing the damage reduction on the strike fighter chassis to 20%. This would allow the starguard/rycer to use charged plating and the other two strikes to pick up either different armor or a different crew passive with charged plating. Some equations might need to be rewritten to prevent unintended negative damage, but otherwise I do not see that 100% damage reduction is that much greater than 99%. The UI could even show zero damage hits.

[JasonSzeremi]

burst laser cannon

 

the last time I was in school these numbers are all not the same . but they are the same gun same level of no upgrade . but a different ship .

 

so if I have numbers like this but you don't . would that mean there is a problem with the game . my numbers should be the same as your numbers at the same level with the same upgrades with the same crew member . and I am telling it is not .

 

compare crew loads outs (you may have selected crew that alter the weapon's performance in some way.

Compare capacitors, some deliberately change blaster range, rate of fire, or damage. Also some of the ships listed do not have capacitors.

 

Sadly, if you are right, and there is a systemic problem with GSF, this forum page isn't the one to report it.

We are here to answer the question: How do we show Strike Fighters love and make them a good pick for pilots.

 

For example: I'm all in favor of allowing BLC to be mounted on strike fighters, there's no reason they can't handle the power load, there's also (almost) no way they will be out turning scouts in a dogfight to make them work better in that situation then the scout.

 

I tried protons and clusters the other day on my T2 strike and watched as a proton made a perfect hit on a strike, then my clusters bounced off their shields... a 100% shield piecing weapon and a 0% shield piercing weapon don't compliment each other.... perhaps if I had lowered their shields with my lasers it would have helped.

 

Part of what is wrong with strikes is how hard it can be to hit, especially moving targets with lasers

the relative ineffectiveness of missiles compounds the problem, as is part of why skilled pilots wholesale defected to the more agile and even better armed scout.

 

For the strike to have a role it needs to be better armed and/or armored then the scout. Difficulty getting cross-hairs on a scout not withstanding, if they can take apart bombers and gunships at close range, then it will have a 'generalist' place. With the scout being the light fighter, that probably takes out the strike and closes rapidly to punish gunships, the strike being the hammer that engages bombers and if it can get close to them, gunships. Gunships being big trouble for strike fighters and bombers (in the open?) although if it hits a scout, that hurts. What role for the bomber? Mines are quite destructive to scouts that have short ranged high dps armaments, those with emp fields or missiles still must deal with an armored target

>suggest replacing armor piercing on blc with something more shot-gun appropriate<

one of the downfalls to using multiple smaller projectiles/energy units, is spreading the force or energy and dissipating the destructive force of it, this isn't a problem for un-armored targets like skin. But against even thinly armored targets. This is why it's useful to armor attack helicopters against small arms fire and to put ceramic tiles on the underside of space planes.

 

On the other hand, if it lacks it 'laser cannons' are the largest caliber lasers a scout can carry, and might deserve armor piercing

Having to choose between weapons that do more dps or weapons that are more armor piercing, gives you more useful options.

[JasonSzeremi]

Speaking of "on-topic" thing, this is more a "wall of crazy" kind of thing, but hey thoughts and ideas, are thoughts and Ideas.

 

Ok so the idea is a "duel ammo" system for missiles. Essentially there is a max ammo (what we have now) and there is a "in the chamber" ammo, where you can have more then 1 (say 2 for protons, 3 for Concs and 4 for clusters just fo an example) missile loaded at a time, once you fire the first missile you begin reloading according to the reload timer until the max "in chamber" ammo capacity is reached again. This would make reload timers still relevant while ALSO allowing for burst missile usage.

 

Along SIDE this particular wall of crazy is if your missiles locked on the in range target automatically and the tone just went off when it was complete then you could right click for the number of missiles you wanted to fire. Obviously with this way the "you are being locked" warning tone would go away instead only having a "missile is in the air" tone when it is fired kind of like Missile sentry drones and seeker mines. This way again you can control the burst, you could fire one missile and watch them break to immediately start relocking, then fire another watch the break relock and then fire what ever missiles are left in the chamber for massive burst damage. Though missile damages and the like might have to be looked at with this system.

 

 

ANOTHER part of this wall of crazy, is maybe you would lock on a max number of targets at a time, IE you dont actually have to target any one but you big locking on everyone in your arc that is in range, and then right click and the missiles are fired at ALL targets. Now obviously this one has downsides when it comes to bursting one target and the reloads could really hurt this one, but that's why its a wall of crazy.

 

Like the way they work in space? you have a limited number of concussion missiles that can be locked onto several targets and then released at once... against a single target you have to lock repeatedly and release the missile

 

the cool down timer could be a reload-timer for the ready missile tubes, strikes would probably have more ready tubes, both ships might have larger overall ammo magazines as the number of missiles that can be fired in short order would be regulated by the number of tubes.

 

This isn't out of line with things in the setting, although it's probably not much better then tractor beams or ships with 3 rotating options under the 1 button (you activate them with the right mouse button like railguns/missiles mines)

[clcooper]

compare crew loads outs (you may have selected crew that alter the weapon's performance in some way.

Compare capacitors, some deliberately change blaster range, rate of fire, or damage. Also some of the ships listed do not have capacitors.

and I was honest but was over looking stuff I didn't know about .

 

Sadly, if you are right, and there is a systemic problem with GSF, this forum page isn't the one to report it.

We are here to answer the question: How do we show Strike Fighters love and make them a good pick for pilots.

and what if I was right. then what should of been done . should I been brushed away .like many did . only one wanted to hear me out and try and fid out what was wrong .

 

For example: I'm all in favor of allowing BLC to be mounted on strike fighters, there's no reason they can't handle the power load, there's also (almost) no way they will be out turning scouts in a dogfight to make them work better in that situation then the scout.

but so many don't want this to be a flight sim they want it like all the MMO. why not but a railgun on the strike there is no reason it cant handle that . so ask all of you which way is it going to be . if you say the strike is build to handle this type of gun . you are saying you want a flight sim. but when I say scout should not take as many shots as it does now . a real scout in 2 shots should be dead . I am told if I want a flight sim . to go play a flight sim . that this is a MMO .

Part of what is wrong with strikes is how hard it can be to hit, especially moving targets with lasers

the relative ineffectiveness of missiles compounds the problem, as is part of why skilled pilots wholesale defected to the more agile and even better armed scout.

Having to choose between weapons that do more dps or weapons that are more armor piercing, gives you more useful options.

when I said the guns have different stat I was bashed . but then why ask for shorter lock on just for the strike . if the lock on is the same for all ships . why just shorter lock on for the strikes

 

if the strikes has the same gun as a scout . but the strike cant do as much damage as the scout . then what is wrong . do you think maybe the scout needs turned down more then the strike needs turned up.