Let's talk about Strike Fighters

tunewalker · May 29, 2015

You're right about the Rycer/Starguard and Pike/Quell, which is why I specifically said those changes wouldn't be enough to make them balanced. I just think those are absolutely necessary additions to those ships since they are supposed to specialize in lasers and missiles respectively. They would also need an upgrade via general Strike fighter chassis buffs (as I mentioned, though I can see the wording may have been a bit confusing).

Many top players (Verain and Drak) agree that the Clarion/Imperium is only one small upgrade away from being meta. Concussion missiles are not used on any meta ship because they aren't a choice on any meta ship (except the T2 bomber but meh). They are certainly very easy to land on even top bomber players, and especially effective on Charged Plating bombers. For example, I think you'd see a lot of people equipping Concussions if they were available on a good chassis like the NovaDive/Blackbolt. I think that build would have a niche meta use (tunneling Charged Plating bombers). Yes I agree they are pretty much useless against good Scout/Gunship players due to the 2 missile breaks. I do like the idea of buffing all missiles and torpedos (except cluster missiles). But also remember that by buffing missile/torpedos, you are also hurting ships with only 1 missile break (i.e. Strikes). So the balance has to be careful, and I think involving Distortion Field is integral. That being said, I reeeeally don't want them tinkering with the perfect balance that currently exists between bombers, scouts, and gunships. Tinkering with DF might have an impact on that.

What's a bit difficult is that the Clarion/Imperium is already close to balanced but the Starguard/Rycer and Pike/Quell are super far off from being balanced. So a Strike Fighter chassis buff that makes Starguard/Rycer and Pike/Quell balanced is going to make Clarion/Imperium overpowered. So I'm not sure how you do it. And I'm not sure how you make Strikes balanced without just making them into Scouts.

I agree with those players, the few times I play these days are with or against those pilots as they are the few pilots I remember still around on bastion from GSF day 1. The clarion is close, but Concussion IS NOT the answer, you want something better against Bombers, thermite melts any bomber alive the moment you can land it, just decrease it and Protons lock time to 3 seconds and it would be a BETTER counter to bombers then giving Clarions Concussion, and guess what that works in 1 game mode, that's it, it doesnt help TDM because truth be told we already HAVE a good counter to bombers in TDM.... Ion Railgun, if the clarion cant be better against SCOUTS then the Gunship there is no reason to run the Clarion as a bomber removal, especially since the 1 thing its good at over other Strikes is its survival and heal capability. You need a reason to take a Clarion OVER a Drone Carrier because THAT is what's fullfilling the heal role in a team right now, what's drone carriers good at? peeling/killing scouts.. Drone Carriers die To gunships. So either the Clarion has to provide similar Scout removal for your gunships WHILE being able to threaten Bombers, or it has to threaten gunships like a scout to take it over the Drone Carrier since if it threatened Gunships obviously it would be the "Support against Gunship stacked teams" while the Drone carrier would be the "Support against Scout stacked teams". You ARENT replacing a gunship with a Clarion, its just not happening the T1 gunship is designed for long range firepower, the Clarion is designed as a support ship there is no way its replacing the Gunship in a teams line up and it still keeps its flavor it needs to be a CONTENDER with the Drone carrirer and the Minelayer, those are its competition because those are the "tough ships that provide good team support" so either it needs to counter the same things those bombers counter to the same or similar effect OR it needs to be COUNTER by a different thing. IE Either it needs to counter scouts and lose to Gunships or it needs to counter gunships and lose to scouts all while preforming the supporty heal role of the team. Concussion missile, as you said, does NONE of that, thus it is not something that would bring it into the meta, it would still be a bad ship that no one should take in a serious Match.

When trying to think of "simple buffs" remember the DIRECTION the ship is headed in, Remember what ships are doing ITS JOB better and how to break it into THAT job, dont try to take it in a completely different direction, all you will end up with is a pish posh of bad components that end up with a jumbled mess of a ship. Concs arent taken on Meta ships isnt because they arent available, its because Concs ARE BAD, end of, if a T2 Scout had the option they MIGHT take it only for T1 Bombers, even then most of the time they would pick clusters over it simply for the DPS and reliability against scouts and gunships. Bombers HAVE it as an option, what do they take? Seekers, ANYTHING friken ANYTHING but concussion, heck even the Sledge hammer the most effective build i have played on it..... Clusters not Concs. basically if its not Cluster and its a lock on weapon its terrible. THere are a couple exceptions Sabo Probe (when its not bugged) and Thermite (when you catch a BOMBER in the open) can be pretty good, sabo because its travel time is so fast most cant dodge it and Thermite because the debuff it puts on the bomber allows you to melt it. EVERYTHING ELSE concussion missile or anything its got 0 to do with how bad of a ship its on, its a bad component, it BEING on the ship is what makes the ship Bad.

Edited May 29, 2015 by tunewalker

idnewton · May 29, 2015

That won't make up for the weapon power pool drain consumption. All the most lethal primary weapons consume energy like a Humvee guzzling gas. Weapon and Engine Power Pools need a buff, with a decrease in lock-ons on the missiles.

I don't agree with the increase to Engine Power Pool, but I do think Weapon Power Pool buff and decreased lock-on time would be acceptable changes. I don't want them to fix Strike Fighters by turning them into Scouts. The two types need to stay separate.

DresG · May 29, 2015

Thank you for posting, Alex! We have been waiting for dev contact for a long, long time. I hope it continues.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is a single major reason Strike fighters suffer, nor is there a single silver bullet that will fix them. Their inefficacy in the meta is determined just as much by the specialized strengths of the other classes (along with some specific components) as it is determined by the Strike's own chassis and component choices.

I'll try to break it out as best I can. I'll use Republic fighter names for simplicity.

Strike Offensive Weaknesses

Offense.1) No surprise burst damage.
Every single Strike weapon involves sustained warning to your target. Whether it's a stream of Rapids, Quads, or Heavies, or the lock-on tone of a missile, your target always has ample time to respond before taking significant damage.

On the other hand, every other class has at least one way to deliver sudden, untelegraphed damage:

NovaDives can combine primary weapons and rocket pods (which, unlike missiles, offer no warning), along with Targeting Telemetry to create not only increased criticals, but criticals that deal increased damage.

Flashfires can do the same with Quads + Pods, or they can just use Burst Laser Cannons (which inherently do surprise burst damage). Again, using Targeting Telemetry or Blaster Overcharge further increases the surprise burst damage.

All Gunships have Slug Railguns, which by their nature deal a sudden burst of shield-piercing, armor-piercing damage, with no warning except a charge-up glow (if you're looking at the Gunship).

Quarrels have Ion Railgun, which deals a sudden burst of high shield-damage (negating the one thing the Strike is "best at") and crippling the target's mobility (which for a Strike is already in trouble). Again, it has no warning except if you happen to be looking toward the charge-up glow.

Warcarriers have their three drones, all of which strike without warning: the railgun drone fires just like a railgun, the Interdiction Drone immediately applies its crippling snare (while doing damage), and the missile drone releases a missile with no warned lock-on time. The only warning happens once the missile is already flight. Seeker Mines are the same--there is only a very narrow window in which the target can react to use its missile-break.

Minelayer mines deal their damage with no time to react. Seismic Mines bypass shields (again negating the Strike's main strength), and Interdiction Mines immediately cripple victim mobility.

All of the above weapons and combinations have the ability to very rapidly kill or cripple a target with little to no warning. Note that none of those combinations involve missiles.

The Strike, on the other hand, has no access to Rocket Pods, Railguns, Drones, nor Mines. The Stirke's secondary weapon offense is limited entirely to missiles, all of which offer significant warning to their target. Tragically, it is even deprived of the one burst damage primary weapon in the game. It has always been a mystery why the Star Guard--as the primary weapon specialist--does not have access to Burst Laser Cannons, while Flashfires, Quarrels, and Condors do.

The only way a Strike can deliver significant, lethal damage before giving a target time to react is on a Star Guard with Ion Cannons and Cluster Missiles. In that case, the Star Guard can strip the shields of a target even while locking on with a Cluster Missile. This is a strong combo, but it is very short range and severely limits the Star Guard's component choices--and it still requires landing a missile. For a class based on versatility, there should be more viable offensive options.

And the Pike and Clarion are simply hopeless when it comes to delivering surprise burst damage, as they cannot even pull off the Ion Cannon/Cluster Missile trick. All of their offensive potential relies on sustained primary weapon fire while attempting to lock on with missiles.

This leads us to the next point:

Offense.2) Missiles are Ineffectual
Missiles require the greatest set up time, are bound by both ammo and cooldown, and offer ample warning to their targets. And yet their damage and secondary effects are largely unimpressive compared to other secondary weapons. Cluster Missiles are the exception--when fully upgraded, they do solid damage, require little lock-on time, have a very short cooldown, and have enough ammo capacity so as not to be very restrictive.

But by far, the biggest reason Cluster Missiles are effective is because they can be spammed. And if you can spam a missile, then you can drain the target of both their engine maneuver missile break and Distortion Field's missile break.

That's the real problem with missiles--there are too few missiles flying around to eat up all of the missile-break's.

One potential solution to this would be to take Distortion Field's missile break away. This would likely go far in balancing the power of Flashfires, but I know there are Quarrel enthusiasts who are concerned such a nerf would hit them too hard (since their only other missile break is the 20-second cooldown Barrel Roll).

If decreasing the number of missile breaks isn't palatable, then the other option is to increase the number and rate of missiles being fired. One way is to simply reduce lock-on time. I'd suggest doing this, not for Clusters, but for every other missile. Too often, long missile locks are spoiled by lag, which sours players on them (and GSF in general). Shortening lock times across the board (except for Cluster Missiles) is a safe fix that will be good for GSF as a whole..

Another interesting question is this: should any missiles have cooldowns at all? Or is lock-on time, warning to target, and ammo limits enough of a check to missile power? I tend to think so. A Strike firing Concussion Missiles (or even the derided Ion Missile!) as fast as he can attain locks would be very threatening and a very strong counter to Evasion, which has long dominated defense. This would be my personal suggestion.

This would be a soft nerf to the Pike's very weak advantage to chain fire two missiles consecutively; however, in a world where missiles have no cooldowns, the Pike's ability to spam both long range torpedoes and short-range dogfighting missiles would be make it a force to be reckoned with.

This change would buff Strikes, but it would also buff Sledgehammers, Condors, and the misbegotten Comet-breaker. Note that even with this buff, Star Guards and Pikes would still be largely passed over in favor of Sledgehammers and Condors, because a Mine or Railgun is superior to the ability to switch between multiple lasers or missiles.

So if you decided "no cooldown on missiles" was the one fix you're going to make, then make it inherent and exclusive to the Strike chassis. Then, at least, they would have a unique capability that might let them edge out Sledgehammers and Condors. I would also recommend giving Clusters (for everyone else) a longer cooldown, to prevent Flashfires from spamming them, and to re-emphasize "spammable missiles" as a unique Strike perk.

Offense.3) Switchable weapons (that aren't Railguns) is not a great #1 system ability.
In judging the value of a "switch weapon" ability, you have to consider how it compares with other #1 abilities. In particular, ask yourself, "If I could trade this ability for a mine, drone, Targeting Telemetry, or Blaster Overcharge?" For Star Guards and Pikes, the answer is "Yes, I'd give away weapon switching for one of those system abilities." For the Clarion, it is a tougher call, as Repair Probes is a solid system ability.

There are five ships in the game that can switch between two different weapons with the #1 key:
Star Guard (two different primary weapons)
Pike (two different secondary weapons, all of which are missiles or torpedoes)
Quarrel (two different railguns)
Comet-breaker (two different secondary weapons, all of which are torpedoes or railguns)
Condor (two different secondary weapons, all of which are missiles or railguns)

I think there is general agreement that of the above list, only two are worth a #1 system ability slot:
Quarrel -- but only with Ion Railgun and Slug Railgun, which complement each other so well. Switching between Plasma and Slug is of no value, as those weapons do not synergize.
Condor - since a Slug Railgun is a great, universal long-range weapon, and Cluster Missiles are a solid short-range weapon that combine well with Burst Laser Cannons

The Star Guard's ability to switch between primary weapons would be more valuable if it had a better set of primary weapons to switch between. Heavy Laser Cannons and Quad Cannons are great long-range weapons, but what's missing is a strong short-range weapon--namely Burst Laser Cannons, but even Light Laser Cannons. Unfortunately, Rapid Laser Cannons are just altogether underpowered and nigh-useless.

Unfortunately, due to the aforementioned weakness of missiles, the Pike has even further to go. The first step would be giving it access to the solid Interdiction Missile and Rocket Pods (!!! -- yes, Rocket Pods on a Strike--they would give the Pike stronger jousting skills and tons of flexibility).

As for the Clarion, the one Strike without a "switch weapon" system ability, its utility is solely defined by Repair Probes. Combat Command and Remote Slicing are largely ignored, the former because of its extreme cooldown, and the latter because of its underwhelming effects (and still long cooldown).

Strike Mobility Weaknesses

Mobility.1) Strikes are often out of engine energy.
It costs a Strike just as much engine energy to engage and sustain afterburners as it does a Bomber or Gunship. That's not only silly, but lethal given the Strike's role. Unlike a Bomber or Gunship, which--once in position, can fulfill their roles while relatively stationary--a Strike needs to boost both to get where it's going and subsequently keep boosting while fighting. In particular, it needs to keep intermittently boosting to keep enemies at optimal range (close enough to hit, but far enough to keep centered).

As it stands, Strikes have to spend all of their energy getting where they are going, with nothing left to actually fight and maneuver with.

Strike afterburner activation and sustain cost needs to be higher than Gunships and Bombers for sure--I would even say it should be equal with Scouts--especially considering that Strike base speed will still be lower.

But even this would not solve the problem, since ...

Mobility.2) Ion Railguns are ruinous to Strikes.
Strikes are uniquely disadvantaged by Ion Railgun. Lacking the Evasion afforded Scouts with Distortion Field, Strikes are easy for an Ion Railgun to hit. And when that hit comes, the Strike (which is probably already almost out of energy) is robbed of whatever engine energy it had left. It can't use Barrel Roll. It can't use afterburner. It is literally dead in space, with no chance of getting to cover, let alone presenting a threat to the Gunship which shot it.

Compare this to what happens with an Ion Railgun hitting other ships. When an Ion Railgun hits a Bomber (which is probably sitting on a full tank of gas), the Bomber shrugs and lurches behind nearby cover. When an Ion Railgun hits another Gunship, that Gunship has usually lost its duel, but has enough gas left to seek cover. Plus, it had a fair and even chance to win. When an Ion Railgun hits a Scout without Distortion Field, that Scout is usually either running Shield-to-Engine Converter or Power Dive, either of which can be used to get it to cover.

This is true of any ship with Power Dive, in fact, and so the Clarion is in a much better state against Ion Railguns than its two classic Strike siblings.

I believe the optimal solution here is to alter Ion Railgun, such that its draining effects are reduced depending on the target's available shields on the arc that was struck.

A fully charged Ion railgun does 1850 shield damage. A Strike's base shield is 1800/arc. I'd propose that, an Ion Railgun's energy drain effect should be related to how much damage it did beyond the victim's shields--this would replace its pitiful hull damage. The more damage that was leftover after the shields were brought down, the more energy drain. But if the Ion Railgun doesn't eat through the full arc of shields, then there should be no energy drain at all.

Not only would this offer extra protection to Strikes, which have inherently high shields, but it would buff all the high-capacity shields, and potentially sway the meta away from Distortion Field a smidge.

Mobility.3) Inability to dogfight at short range.
Strikes have stronger turning speed than Gunships and Bombers, but it is still significantly lesser than Scouts. Combined with the lack of Burst Laser Cannons, this dooms the Strike to lose any dogfight against a Scout--or even a Quarrel or Condor with Burst Laser Cannons.

Even a Quarrel, as slow as it turns, can clean up Strikes under a satellite quite easily, using Burst Laser Cannons. The Condor, which can get more turning speed and Cluster Missiles, can do so even better.

Ultimately, a huge problem in the game is that Rapid Laser Cannons and Light Laser Cannons are just woefully ineffective against a target that is moving quickly, or getting frequent breaks of cover--which is pretty much the name of the game under a satellite in Domination. The Strike does not have the tools (namely Burst Laser Cannons) to play that game well.

Giving Strikes Burst Laser Cannons would help here, but they are still going to lose to Scouts, who have superior turning, Evasion, and offensive cooldowns. This means that a Strike has very little chance of ousting a Scout off a node, and no chance of beating a Scout who closes on it, even in open space.

This is perhaps the hardest to solve. I suggest giving the Strike superior turning speed compared to the Scout. From a lore perspective, it makes sense that a space superiority fighter could turn faster than a speedy scouting craft. Plus the Scout would still have the speed and Evasion advantage, as well as its offensive cooldowns. But the Strike could claim definitively that it is the best "dogfighter".

Strike Defensive Weakness

Defense.1) There is but one Defense, and its name is Evasion.
The Strike chassis trades 5% Evasion away to get 5% Damage Reduction in return. It trades away access to Distortion Field to get Charged Plating. These are just simply bad trades, because Damage Reduction is largely useless. Not only does Damage Reduction not reduce damage to your shields, but it also does nothing to reduce the magnitude of harmful effects like snares. Worst of all, there are too many weapons with 100% Armor Piercing, which completely negate your component choice.

And let's not even talk about offering Charged Plating on a starter ship that doesn't have an Armor component to stack with, which is the most horrendous newbie trap in the game.

Evasion, on the other hand, has nothing but upside. It reduces damage taken to both your shields and hull. It saves you entirely from detrimental draining or snaring effects. One might think missiles are supposed to be the anti-Evasion weapon, but Distortion Field is the one shield in the game to offer a missile break. And there is no ubiquitous weapon upgrade that says "Ignores Evasion 100%", as there is with Armor Piercing.

The solution here is not to give Strikes Distortion Field or more Evasion. The solution is to make other choices viable, and to nerf the overall effectiveness of Evasion if necessary. Not only does Evasion create a Scout hegemony, but it needlessly confuses and frustrates new players. They aim at a target, dead center, shoot at it ... and nothing happens. It makes GSF look amateur and laggy and broken.

100% Armor Piercing should be reserved for very special, very hard-to-hit-with components. Personally, I think only Proton Torpedo should have it. Slug Railgun's armor piercing magnitude should be based on the range to target. Shooting at 15km? No armor-piercing. Shooting at 3km? 100%. Shooting at 10km? Maybe 40%.

All other weapons which currently have Armor Piercing of 100% should have it reduced to 20 or 30%, I think. If someone elects to build for Damage Reduction, they need to get something out of it, even against armor-piercing weapons.

This change, however, would necessitate a reduction in Charged Plating's magnitude and/or duration.

Conclusion

By no means am I presenting the above ideas as the only solutions--or frankly as the only problems Strikes have. As I said, it's a complicated, multi-faceted problem. As far as Strikes can be fixed without touching other ships, great. But I do believe that at least some small adjustments will be needed... to Burst Laser Cannons, to Distortion Field, to Slug and Ion Railgun ... in order for Strikes to carve out a lasting place.

Thank you again for finally stopping by, Alex. I hope this can continue to be a 2-way conversation.

Nemarus obviously has a deep understanding of the game,. He makes good points and I only disagree with one thing, SF shouldn't have BLC (IMO no ship should, just GSs if it must exist), SFs do need a buff to RFL or adding LLC.

Personally, the best buff SFs could get would be throught Power Management/Mobility. It costs too much to move around and virtually we have no advantage dogfighting anyone but a bomber (doesn't mean a good pilot can't make it work, but it shouldn't come with so much effort when every other ship role does its thing so easily)

Edited May 29, 2015 by DresG

Enurrsha · May 29, 2015

Thanks for the apparent renewed developer interest in GSF - all of us "old timers" & "die hards" truly appreciate it.

Since this is a "toss out ideas on how to 'fix' Strike Fighters" thread, and being a big fan & longtime pilot of the Pike (yes, I really like using missiles & torpedoes), I'll throw out some ideas. It seems to me that the "quickest" way to attempt to "fix" strikes would be through chassis bonuses that are strike-only. This would also seem to me to require the least amount of developer/programmer resources/time, and be the easiest to watch the evolution of & tweak/reverse if needed. Of course, as mentioned, blanket strike chassis bonuses run the risk of giving too much to the Clarion, but maybe it would be possible to in some way "prorate" or adjust the bonuses based on exactly which strike fighter. Also as others have mentioned, it makes more sense to risk giving too much to the strike class than to risk taking away from all other ship classes. All that said & based on my own experience & some posts in this thread and others, here are some ideas (these are suggested #s, devs would have to play around with these of course)....

-- no change in weapon damage or relative accuracy or component choices (other than possibly adding in the other missile types)

-- no change to hit points or shield power per arc

-- 50% increase to ALL base weapon ranges (guns & missiles)

-- 50% decrease to ALL missile/torpedo lock-on, cooldown, & reload times

-- 50%-100% increase to blaster power pool

-- 50%-100% increase to missile/torpedo capacities

-- 50%-100% increase to shield regen rate

-- 50% decrease to shield regen delay

-- 50%-100% increase to engine power pool

-- 50%-100% increase to engine regen rate

Personally, if all of these bonuses were implemented to some degree, I think you might actually manage to address the issues of low burst damage, double missile breaks, ion railgun spam, survivability in general, maneuverability in general, etc.

Yes I know these changes would seem to make it too easy for a strike to kill gunships & overpowered in general, but I personally don't really think so given how ridiculously underpowered they really are currently.

Some thoughts on why these changes wouldn't, for instance, make a protorp strike too powerful...

base proton range is 10km, add my range bonus you get to 15km which is equal to railgun, then you add in the T5 protorp upgrade & you can now lock & fire from 16.5km (this seems extreme but consider that missiles generally are expected to have longer ranges than artillery in the first place), the way GSF works though to fire at a gunship 16.5km away would require you to be able to target the gunship (which is likely equipping dampening sensors + crew bonus) which would mean needing longer sensor range or having an ally (or sensor beacon, or perhaps a drone) in comm range who has the gunship in sensor range & maintains that information-bridge (firing telemetry) to you until you have locked & launched, of course you can now lock in 1/2 the time but still --- as always though, all of these things assume the circumstances of the moment align in your favor, meaning you still must have & maintain line of sight, keep it in the reticule, & generally have no other ship - gunship, scout, strike (working on an extreme-range protorp lock on you perhaps), etc threatening YOU significantly --- and as we all know, most gunships are equipping 2x missile breaks, so they can still break the lock anytime before the missile gets there, and the longer range shot of course means a longer flight and therefore more time to hit the breaker-button

Sorry for all the rambling. Hope my points didn't get lost in the midst of all that mess, heh heh.

Nemarus · May 29, 2015

I like this idea a lot. I think a Clarion/Imperium with 7500-8550m Quads might be a bit overpowered, but it's hard to say.

I don't see how it would be overpowered. The moment a Scout gets within 3000m, the Quads have no chance of hitting it.

I actually don't think this change would fix much at all.

I regularly fly builds maximized for range, because I enjoy the style. When I'm killing something at 6900m, I'm not wishing, "Man I wish I could've engaged this guy at 8500m." I'm too busy worrying about anything getting within 3000m of me. Or the Gunship who is going to Ion me from 15000m.

And in Domination, it doesn't matter what my range is--my target can just fly around a satellite and deny me LOS.

There's not really a practical difference between 6900m and 8500m, or even 10000m. Mid-range is still going to get owned by Gunships and Scouts. We have already seen that going "the middle road" has not worked out for Strikes, because specializing in an extreme is always better.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Nemarus

themachinemann · May 29, 2015

short version: strike fighters working as intended

Long version:

Strike fighters are an amazing ship class to fly for new and old fighters alike. Cluster missiles and quads are the heart of GSF and make a really enjoyable and strong class of ship, without being overpowered.

Some people find them seriously weak, others find them overpowered, others balanced, so firstly I'd like to make a suggestion to help new players. Please put an explanation of F1/F2/F3 somewhere prominent, either in the GSF hanger window or the GSF tutorial, because some people I chat to play for weeks/months without knowing and it makes a huge difference.

All the strike fighters seem to balance defense and attack well given the right setup, with personal preference factoring into high end starfighting, e.g. directional shields on the rycer can be amazing but not everyone's taste. Therein lies another issue where the stock ships have very bad missiles and lasers, which (again) most new pilots don't realise. Aces can do well with no upgrades, however new pilots will get farmed with no upgrades and won't learn the game or keep queueing.

Strike fighters are not quite as good as sting/flashfire scout but require a lower skill level. I think that's a good spot to be in.

If anything I'd tweak the defense on strike fighters to make them less susceptible to gunship/bomber roflstomp premades. I'm an ace who moved on from gsf because of these low skilled roflstomp teams and the toxic environment they caused for new players. If you're on their team it's boring cause they're farming bads, if you're not on their team it's boring cause they're farming bads. So yeah I guess that's my summary; other classes should be toned down by being (a) weaker, or (b) harder to play, rather than changing strike fighter.

Saaz · May 29, 2015

Personally, I feel the Meta for GSF is broken. We had a very active GSF guild and while not so noticeable with the Gunship, scout and SF combo at launch, with the addition of the bomber, the focus of the meta has moved away from dogfighting, to more strategic deployment of mines and Gunships.

For me, the most fun part of GSF was the dogfighting - which is really lost in the current GSF experience.

I know you don't want to remove content but even simply having Scout / SF only matches would make me return to GSF because the current meta just isn't fun.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Saaz

RiVaN_ · May 29, 2015

I honestly think, in order to make the Strike more of the Xwing/Tie of it's age that SF's need to have heavier Armor or shields, a slight speed boost and hard hitting weapons.

GSF NEEDS a ship to counter the Gunship.

While a skilled Scout can get the drop on a GS and a pair of skilled scouts can knock them down, being able to 1 shot most other ships makes the Gunner OP.

Buffing the Strike in a way that makes Gunners fear them, but scouts able to out maneuver and whittle them down makes sense to me.

I would like to see the strike fighter able to get a temp speed boost that can get them in range of a Gunner, then a combo of shields and guns that will allow them to, tactfully, take down a gunship.

I think that, to the player base on the Pub side the Strike represents what we imagine the x wing to be. Just like the flash fire represents the A-Wing. Allowing players to experience what it would be like to fly the great, great, great (times 3000) grandfather of the x-wing would get this ship back in the game, give us some interesting dog fights and ensure that GSF isn't a snipe fest for Gunners.

All personal opinion and I by no means pretend to speak for the majority of Pilots. Mostly because I'll still play my Flashfire 90% of the time, even if Gunners continue to turn me into mince meat.

Linuxizer · May 29, 2015

The Force is with us!

If you could only pick one section to buff

The best defense is offense!

No no, Making them Stupid OP or Highly Irritating is EXACTLY what's needed.....

MAKE STRIKE FIGHTERS OVERPOWERED

That's my cue for this crazy idea again. Allow the T1 Strike to fire both primaries together, and both primaries can be the same type or different types, and the rate of fire is not halved (but the blaster power pool is depleted twice as quickly). Press 1 to cycle between heavy/ion/heavy+ion or heavy/double-heavy, etc. Allow the T2 Strike to fire both secondaries together. The effects are easy to evaluate--just watch any video where a Strike picks up a Damage Overcharge, but imagine double the blaster power consumption.

What about the T3 Strike? I would give it the Heavy Laser and Cluster Missile.

Too extreme? A 30% or 50% or whatever boost to all weapons on all Strikes then, like others have said.

Increasing only the turn-rate of Strikes (even beyond that of Scouts) would have little benefit, and would make them too difficult for casual gamers to control. Increasing speed/boost alone would not help in clearing minefields in Domination. Increasing shields/health alone would just help Gunship and Scout pilots set new damage records.

forcing people to choose a dogfighter or an energy fighter

Sorry, this isn't Il-2 Forgotten Battles. In GSF, firepower overshadows manoeuvrability, and anyway there is already a choice of thrusters: speed, regen, turning.

Set disto feild to only have a 33% chance to break locks. Watch as the striker makes a comeback, and listen to the cries of gunship and scout pilots everywhere as suddenly they don't have two guaranteed lock breaks.

Sorry, Harbinger gunship walls that use feedback shield instead of DF are still not countered by Strikes. Nemarus who uses S2E instead of DF does not have 8 Strikes chasing him.

one sting using BLC's ended up getting 29 kills with only 3 deaths. This sting killed gunships, bombers, strikers, and other scouts. Melting my bomber in 2-3 hits. Out of his 3 deaths, i had 1 and 1 assist on him.
Edit: The reason for me bringing this up is that no striker could do this, although gunships and bombers could come close to it.

What about this: http://i.imgur.com/Wsztrum.jpg Sorry, I couldn't resist . The point is, Strikes are inferior in competitive matches. In uncompetitive matches, all ships are good.

This is off-topic but bear with me. It is well past the time to just give everyone a T1 bomber and a T1 gunship for free. The 5000 fleet req. from the introductory GSF mission is too obscure for the typical rookie, who will get the wrong impression that he's given only weak ships to fight strong ships. GSF will not get a second chance to make a first impression.

Danalon · May 29, 2015

I was using the T3-Strike for a while but didn't fly it recently. Usually I only fly Strikes when making a new character and only having acces to T1-Scout and T1-Strike.

I gave Strikes some thought (not as much as others did, looking at the rainbow post) even before this thread and I might as well share them now. I image Strikes as allaround ships, hard to stop and with good sustained damage.

Remove Quads from every other ship than Strikes. Give Quads the same range as HLC and give them 20% shield and 20% armor pierce by default. Also decrease tracking penalty on them. This will ensure Strikes have a good all around weapon.

Increase base armor on Strikes. This will increase their survivability against bombers and some lasers. Also Strikes should be a bit more durable, when attacking heavy fortified Satellites.

Give Strikes a bigger engine and weapon energy pool. They run out of power too fast.

Decrease the lockon time Strikes need for Torpedos. I imagine Torpedos with the lockon time of Concussion missiles.

Decrease the effect of negative effects against the strike. This includes Ionrail's energy drain and Engine and Reactor Disruption, EMP debuffs, Snares from Interdiction weapons, etc.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Danalon

tommmsunb · May 29, 2015

The Force is with us!

The best defense is offense!

That's my cue for this crazy idea again. Allow the T1 Strike to fire both primaries together, and both primaries can be the same type or different types, and the rate of fire is not halved (but the blaster power pool is depleted twice as quickly). Press 1 to cycle between heavy/ion/heavy+ion or heavy/double-heavy, etc. Allow the T2 Strike to fire both secondaries together. The effects are easy to evaluate--just watch any video where a Strike picks up a Damage Overcharge, but imagine double the blaster power consumption.

What about the T3 Strike? I would give it the Heavy Laser and Cluster Missile.

Too extreme? A 30% or 50% or whatever boost to all weapons on all Strikes then, like others have said.

Increasing only the turn-rate of Strikes (even beyond that of Scouts) would have little benefit, and would make them too difficult for casual gamers to control. Increasing speed/boost alone would not help in clearing minefields in Domination. Increasing shields/health alone would just help Gunship and Scout pilots set new damage records.

Sorry, this isn't Il-2 Forgotten Battles. In GSF, firepower overshadows manoeuvrability, and anyway there is already a choice of thrusters: speed, regen, turning.

Sorry, Harbinger gunship walls that use feedback shield instead of DF are still not countered by Strikes. Nemarus who uses S2E instead of DF does not have 8 Strikes chasing him.

What about this: http://i.imgur.com/Wsztrum.jpg Sorry, I couldn't resist . The point is, Strikes are inferior in competitive matches. In uncompetitive matches, all ships are good.

This is off-topic but bear with me. It is well past the time to just give everyone a T1 bomber and a T1 gunship for free. The 5000 fleet req. from the introductory GSF mission is too obscure for the typical rookie, who will get the wrong impression that he's given only weak ships to fight strong ships. GSF will not get a second chance to make a first impression.

Actually the original design for bombers was to fire two guns at once in beta. And that was considered way too overpowered to include in the game. As for strikes not being able to pull of stats like that. Yeah thats bull. http://i.imgur.com/Xq04hO3.jpg that was like 7 months ago or something

RickDagles · May 29, 2015

The clarion is close, but Concussion IS NOT the answer, you want something better against Bombers, thermite melts any bomber alive the moment you can land it, just decrease it and Protons lock time to 3 seconds and it would be a BETTER counter to bombers then giving Clarions Concussion

Agreed, but buffing Thermites also buffs NovaDive/Blackbolt, which introduces other possible balance issues. Buffing Protons could work.

and guess what that works in 1 game mode, that's it, it doesnt help TDM because truth be told we already HAVE a good counter to bombers in TDM.... Ion Railgun, if the clarion cant be better against SCOUTS then the Gunship there is no reason to run the Clarion as a bomber removal, especially since the 1 thing its good at over other Strikes is its survival and heal capability. You need a reason to take a Clarion OVER a Drone Carrier because THAT is what's fullfilling the heal role in a team right now, what's drone carriers good at? peeling/killing scouts.

Comparing the Clarion/Imperium to the T2 Bomber isn't worthwhile at all. The only thing they have in common is that they can repair stuff.

The Clarion/Imperium is already quite good in TDM at breaking up a bomber ball. It excels at deroosting Gunships while laughing at railgun drones and slug railgun shots (high HP and repair probes). Ion railgun is a bit of a threat, but at least you can power dive to safety and regenerate. As part of a coordinated team, it complements Battlescouts very well in a bomberball attack. The problem is that the scouts have better DPS, better evasion, better engines, and 2 missile breaks -- they do the job better in every way EXCEPT the Clarion/Imperium is much better at taking railgun drone and slug railgun shots that actually hit (with all the evasion buffs the Scout is obviously less likely to get hit by the slug railgun in the first place, but that's a different argument entirely*). The ideal way to attack the bomberball is obviously to get a Mangler/Quarrel to kill the drones and mines and then charge in with Battlescouts. But if you give the Clarion/Imperium some more teeth then it may be seriously worth using in that scenario. Maybe, maybe not, but it at least helps.

So either the Clarion has to provide similar Scout removal for your gunships WHILE being able to threaten Bombers, or it has to threaten gunships like a scout to take it over the Drone Carrier since if it threatened Gunships obviously it would be the "Support against Gunship stacked teams" while the Drone carrier would be the "Support against Scout stacked teams". You ARENT replacing a gunship with a Clarion, its just not happening the T1 gunship is designed for long range firepower, the Clarion is designed as a support ship there is no way its replacing the Gunship in a teams line up and it still keeps its flavor it needs to be a CONTENDER with the Drone carrirer and the Minelayer, those are its competition because those are the "tough ships that provide good team support" so either it needs to counter the same things those bombers counter to the same or similar effect OR it needs to be COUNTER by a different thing. IE Either it needs to counter scouts and lose to Gunships or it needs to counter gunships and lose to scouts all while preforming the supporty heal role of the team. Concussion missile, as you said, does NONE of that, thus it is not something that would bring it into the meta, it would still be a bad ship that no one should take in a serious Match.

I agree with what you're saying. Basically you are saying there is only room for 3 ship types in the game. And I think that's valid. But what do you propose we do to make Strikes worthwhile without just making them redundant with Scouts?

When trying to think of "simple buffs" remember the DIRECTION the ship is headed in, Remember what ships are doing ITS JOB better and how to break it into THAT job, dont try to take it in a completely different direction, all you will end up with is a pish posh of bad components that end up with a jumbled mess of a ship. Concs arent taken on Meta ships isnt because they arent available, its because Concs ARE BAD, end of, if a T2 Scout had the option they MIGHT take it only for T1 Bombers, even then most of the time they would pick clusters over it simply for the DPS and reliability against scouts and gunships. Bombers HAVE it as an option, what do they take? Seekers, ANYTHING friken ANYTHING but concussion, heck even the Sledge hammer the most effective build i have played on it..... Clusters not Concs. basically if its not Cluster and its a lock on weapon its terrible. THere are a couple exceptions Sabo Probe (when its not bugged) and Thermite (when you catch a BOMBER in the open) can be pretty good, sabo because its travel time is so fast most cant dodge it and Thermite because the debuff it puts on the bomber allows you to melt it. EVERYTHING ELSE concussion missile or anything its got 0 to do with how bad of a ship its on, its a bad component, it BEING on the ship is what makes the ship Bad.

Firstly, I was talking about Concussion on NovaDive/Blackbolt, not T2 Scout. Of course you wouldn't tinker with the current Battlescout builds, they are the core of the game. But if you had room on your bar for a 5th ship, a NovaDive/Blackbolt with Concussions would be a cool and useful niche ship to pull out when the time is right (a well flown CP bomber is giving you troubles). 532 damage straight to hull, or 709 with Bypass co-pilot. That could be incredibly handy.

Bombers that have access to concussion missiles obviously don't use them for 2 main reasons. One, they are built for area denial, and concussions don't deny areas -- mines do. Second, bombers have a terrible turn rate and therefore are the worst ships for firing missiles.

*Clarion/Imperium with full directional shields, reinforced armor, and repair probes essentially gives it 2520 shields and 2310 hull or 4830 hp with 10% base evasion that cannot be stacked. That means you need over 3 fully charged railgun shots to bring down a properly equipped Clarion/Imperium . That's more than enough time to power dive to safety. If you double up the directional shields that is approximately 6800 hit points for face shots.

By comparison, the common evasion Flashfire/Sting has 1430 shields and 950 hull (2380 hp, less than half of the Clarion/Imperium) with 33% base evasion stackable to 91% for 6 seconds(Distortion Field+Targetting Telemetry+Running Interference), 56% for 15 seconds(TT+RI) or 48%(RI) for 20 seconds. When you consider that a fully centered railgun shot with wingman active is 124% accurate, those evasion numbers drop to 67% (6 sec), 32% (15 sec), 24% (20 sec), or 9% (passive) IMO it is debatable that the Clarion/Imperium is just as tanky as the evasion Scout in some situations (i.e. players that hold the railgun charge until Distorion Field has subsided).

Edited May 29, 2015 by RickDagles

tunewalker · May 29, 2015

Agreed, but buffing Thermites also buffs NovaDive/Blackbolt, which introduces other possible balance issues. Buffing Protons could work.

Comparing the Clarion/Imperium to the T2 Bomber isn't worthwhile at all. The only thing they have in common is that they can repair stuff.

The Clarion/Imperium is already quite good in TDM at breaking up a bomber ball. It excels at deroosting Gunships while laughing at railgun drones and slug railgun shots (high HP and repair probes). Ion railgun is a bit of a threat, but at least you can power dive to safety and regenerate. As part of a coordinated team, it complements Battlescouts very well in a bomberball attack. The problem is that the scouts have better DPS, better evasion, better engines, and 2 missile breaks -- they do the job better in every way EXCEPT the Clarion/Imperium is much better at taking railgun drone and slug railgun shots that actually hit (with all the evasion buffs the Scout is obviously less likely to get hit by the slug railgun in the first place, but that's a different argument entirely). The ideal way to attack the bomberball is obviously to get a Mangler/Quarrel to kill the drones and mines and then charge in with Battlescouts. But if you give the Clarion/Imperium some more teeth then it may be seriously worth using in that scenario. Maybe, maybe not, but it at least helps.

I agree with what you're saying. Basically you are saying there is only room for 3 ship types in the game. And I think that's valid. But what do you propose we do to make Strikes worthwhile without just making them redundant with Scouts?

Firstly, I was talking about Concussion on NovaDive/Blackbolt, not T2 Scout. Of course you wouldn't tinker with the current Battlescout builds, they are the core of the game. But if you had room on your bar for a 5th ship, a NovaDive/Blackbolt with Concussions would be a cool and useful niche ship to pull out when the time is right (a well flown CP bomber is giving you troubles). 532 damage straight to hull, or 709 with Bypass co-pilot. That could be incredibly handy.

Bombers that have access to concussion missiles obviously don't use them for 2 main reasons. One, they are build for area denial, and concussions don't deny areas - mines do. Second, bombers have a terrible turn rate and therefore are the worst ships for firing missiles.

Again if your idea is to send it at a Gunship Bomber ball wall, fine that's good, Concussions arent going to help you.

If you want to put Conc on a T1 scout... ok... guess whats better and will always be better and why no Nova should ever take concs since it has access to it as a Niche killing bomber tool..... Thermite and Rocket pods... seriously Concussion missiles are BAD, their is no reason to ever take them on any ship... they are bad. They dont do enough damage to bombers and they are to easily dodgeable by any other ship save for a strikes which are bad which is the inherant problem.

I'm not really saying there are only 3 roles in the game. I am just saying this is what you are dealing with, if you are going for a SMALL change then the change needs to be along hte lines the ship is already headed towards and close to. It needs to be something that allows it to break in. The clarions heal and high health and inherrintly slow moving body is all made because it is DESIGNED to be a support ship. Which means it should act like it. Its not meant to be a power house knife fighter, that's the scouts job. Its not meant to put on serious long range pain, that's the Gunships job. The closest thing to "Support fighter" in the meta is a bomber, so you need a reason to either take this ship ALONG SIDE that bomber, or instead of that bomber. I mean if you can think of another 4th roll that the Clarion actually fits as far as flavor goes I am all ears, what ever that role is, giving it Conc missile will fail MISSERABLY at giving it that role. You dont fix a "bad ship" by giving it yet ANOTHER "bad component" and that is EXACTLY what concussion missile is. It hasnt save any of the other ships its on, and THEY have Heavy laser canon for even better armor piercing then the clarion (not to mention Conc's only have Armor if you select it, and I dont know about every one else but I REALLY like the idea of engine drain on it being useful and the weapon NOT relegated to "Crappy armor piercing weapon" cus pretty much every other one is better.)

I dont know what role the strike would take, it could take all kinds of roles.

As I have said, I would like to see them take up the Mantel of Jack of all trades, not the current mantel of Master of none.

Edit: That's IF you take directionals and NOT charged plating. If you DO take Directionals you are now more vulnerable to Seismic mines, Rail guns still have a good 30% shield pierce so yes it will almost always only take 3 shots, but 3 shots is still fairly good I will give you that, though no better then any Bomber can take thanks to their massive hulls and their access to shields like overcharge and the like... basically great... bombers can do that to and they arent THAT much slower minus the power dive. This is assuming also that you have no bogy on your tail (and if you are trying to get into a bomber nest... you have boggies) since putting shields forward ensures that your tail is going to take full damage so enjoy that.

Also here is a fun fact

Pike QCS and 10% shield Companion and 5% evasion AND light weight armor.... 19% evasion 1440 shields.... vs T2 scout, do I even need to say the giant elephant in the room.

Basically that SOUNDS impressive, but when you REALLY compare it with how the ship moves.... it BETTER be able to take those shots or it wouldnt even REMOTELY be close to breaking into the meta. The fact that it can take those shots and it STILL hasnt broken in just tells you even MORE how broken strikes are.

Edited May 29, 2015 by tunewalker

RickDagles · May 29, 2015

Again if your idea is to send it at a Gunship Bomber ball wall, fine that's good, Concussions arent going to help you.

Yes, it will help you by allowing you to do at least 1108 more damage more than you would have.

If you want to put Conc on a T1 scout... ok... guess whats better and will always be better and why no Nova should ever take concs since it has access to it as a Niche killing bomber tool..... Thermite and Rocket pods..

Agree to disagree then. Because in the current state, thermites don't work against good players. You are right that the rocket pods can fill a similar role to the concussion missile. And rocket pods would be really cool on a Clarion/Imperium too, but then it is one step closer to a Scout.

I'm not really saying there are only 3 roles in the game. I am just saying this is what you are dealing with, if you are going for a SMALL change then the change needs to be along hte lines the ship is already headed towards and close to. It needs to be something that allows it to break in. The clarions heal and high health and inherrintly slow moving body is all made because it is DESIGNED to be a support ship. Which means it should act like it. Its not meant to be a power house knife fighter, that's the scouts job. Its not meant to put on serious long range pain, that's the Gunships job. The closest thing to "Support fighter" in the meta is a bomber, so you need a reason to either take this ship ALONG SIDE that bomber, or instead of that bomber. I mean if you can think of another 4th roll that the Clarion actually fits as far as flavor goes I am all ears, what ever that role is, giving it Conc missile will fail MISSERABLY at giving it that role. You dont fix a "bad ship" by giving it yet ANOTHER "bad component" and that is EXACTLY what concussion missile is. It hasnt save any of the other ships its on, and THEY have Heavy laser canon for even better armor piercing then the clarion (not to mention Conc's only have Armor if you select it, and I dont know about every one else but I REALLY like the idea of engine drain on it being useful and the weapon NOT relegated to "Crappy armor piercing weapon" cus pretty much every other one is better.)

True it fails at being a good support ship as intended. But as it stands it is a damn good tank ship with the ability to occasionally help teammates. If you want to enhance the support aspects then there needs to be huge buffs to the range of repair probes and several buffs to shield projector.

I dont know what role the strike would take, it could take all kinds of roles.

As I have said, I would like to see them take up the Mantel of Jack of all trades, not the current mantel of Master of none.

The problem is that there are only 3 roles in the game. One, shoot stuff from far away. Two, area denial. Three, close range fighter. I think in order to add another role, you need to add 2 roles. And that was what the plan was initially (stealth ships). I dunno maybe give Targetting Telemetry to Strikes and let them counter Stealth ships and then Scouts can use Blaster Overcharge.

Edit: That's IF you take directionals and NOT charged plating. If you DO take Directionals you are now more vulnerable to Seismic mines,

IMO Directionals are vastly superior because 1 repair probe heals the damage done by 1 seismic mine, and I'm not constantly running into seismic mines.

Rail guns still have a good 30% shield pierce so yes it will almost always only take 3 shots, but 3 shots is still fairly good I will give you that, though no better then any Bomber can take thanks to their massive hulls and their access to shields like overcharge and the like... basically great... bombers can do that to and they arent THAT much slower minus the power dive.

The Clarion is 33% faster than the Warcarrier, that's a staggering difference. When would you ever attack a Gunship with a Bomber head on? The Sledgehammer is a much better comparison, but you wouldn't pick overcharged shields on that, you'd also pick directionals for the instant shield regeneration (switch the injured shields to the uninjured side and there's no regen delay).

This is assuming also that you have no bogy on your tail (and if you are trying to get into a bomber nest... you have boggies) since putting shields forward ensures that your tail is going to take full damage so enjoy that.

I'm just saying you have the ability to take a face shot with both shields forward if the situation calls for it. Arguing about the usefulness of directional shields is an entirely new tangent I don't want to go on.

Also here is a fun fact
Pike QCS and 10% shield Companion and 5% evasion AND light weight armor.... 19% evasion 1440 shields.... vs T2 scout, do I even need to say the giant elephant in the room.

Yes, that build sucks hard. What does that have to do with anything we're discussing?

Edited May 29, 2015 by RickDagles

tommmsunb · May 29, 2015

I honestly think, in order to make the Strike more of the Xwing/Tie of it's age that SF's need to have heavier Armor or shields, a slight speed boost and hard hitting weapons.
GSF NEEDS a ship to counter the Gunship.

While a skilled Scout can get the drop on a GS and a pair of skilled scouts can knock them down, being able to 1 shot most other ships makes the Gunner OP.

Buffing the Strike in a way that makes Gunners fear them, but scouts able to out maneuver and whittle them down makes sense to me.

I would like to see the strike fighter able to get a temp speed boost that can get them in range of a Gunner, then a combo of shields and guns that will allow them to, tactfully, take down a gunship.

I think that, to the player base on the Pub side the Strike represents what we imagine the x wing to be. Just like the flash fire represents the A-Wing. Allowing players to experience what it would be like to fly the great, great, great (times 3000) grandfather of the x-wing would get this ship back in the game, give us some interesting dog fights and ensure that GSF isn't a snipe fest for Gunners.

All personal opinion and I by no means pretend to speak for the majority of Pilots. Mostly because I'll still play my Flashfire 90% of the time, even if Gunners continue to turn me into mince meat.

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

RickDagles · May 29, 2015

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

Bingo, please don't nerf anything that already works.

As a side note, everyone keeps talking about Strike fighters being intended as multi-role fighters or jack of all trades, but that is honestly bogus. The Strike has no railgun and no mines, how could it possibly even come close to being considered multi-role? The Sledgehammer is more of a multi-role fighter than any Strike because it has access to area denial (mines or drone) and close-ish range weapons. Even the Condor is more of a multi-role fighter than any Strike because it has a railgun as well as close range Burst Laser Cannons and Cluster missiles.

Edited May 29, 2015 by RickDagles

Pucmara · May 29, 2015

Flew countless battles in strikes and I love the T1 (Star Guard) and T3 (Clarion)

T2 (Pike) feels a bit off.

For the T1:

Using Ions in any combination will help kill bombers quite well, but you will need some help from others if the bomber pilot is good.

If he just hangs under a sattelite spamming mines and doing nothing else they are easy blaster fodder.

Gunship killing is fine also as long as you have half a brain and not fly straight at them.

If they use Ions and get a jump on you, then yeah, you're screwed if you can't get to a hiding spot fast enough.

Scouts are a problem if they start circling you. Especially the T2 scouts with Burst.

They then simply get outmaneuvered, maybe adding bursts to a strike or increasing evasion or maneuverability may help here or add another weapon type or buff to them that increases short range accuracy for the weapons.

For the T2:

It feels like a missile gunboat.

If you get into close range of scouts and bombers, the armoring on this ship is so bad that you are pretty much dead.

GS killing can be OK for the same reason as the T1.

Same fixes as above could apply as the T1, but this ship is simply way more squishy compared to the T1.

For the T3:

Don't think this one needs fixing.

It is a support ship with heavy armor and support abilities.

When I fly this in TDM or even Domination, there are many battles I come out off with 0 deaths.

I have a few guildies that fly these also and they have the same situation.

Even in TDM we end up in the top kills section.

The defensive capabilities even allow head-on approaches to gunships and still killing them without issues, same with bombers (but under a sattelite can be an issue due to torp lock-on and maneuverability).

Yes, scouts can get a drop on you and if they circle you. All you can do is stay alive while your team mates pick em off.

Again, I don't think the role for this one has to change.

Looking forward to where this initiative is going.

Cheers,

Puc, Unrelenting/Red Eclipse

RickDagles · May 29, 2015

I just re-read this entire thread and there are some great ideas out there. I think Nemarus' "rainbow" post hits the nail on the head and it should speak for the community. I do have some minor disagreements (listed below) but otherwise I think it's very very solid.

Offense.1) No surprise burst damage.
Every single Strike weapon involves sustained warning to your target. Whether it's a stream of Rapids, Quads, or Heavies, or the lock-on tone of a missile, your target always has ample time to respond before taking significant damage.

I don't think you're giving Heavy Laser Cannons enough credit here. With their long range and shield piercing, they can certainly can do some huge surprise hull damage. The enemy's ship HUD arrow doesn't even increase in size when you are in HLC range. You're right that it can't out right surprise KILL, but surprise hull damage is certainly very dangerous unless your teammates are all completely useless and can't capitalize on it.

One potential solution to this would be to take Distortion Field's missile break away. This would likely go far in balancing the power of Flashfires, but I know there are Quarrel enthusiasts who are concerned such a nerf would hit them too hard (since their only other missile break is the 20-second cooldown Barrel Roll). Personally, I do not share this concern--I fly a Quarrel with Feedback Shield, and missiles are rarely a concern for me.

If decreasing the number of missile breaks isn't palatable, then the other option is to increase the number and rate of missiles being fired. One way is to simply reduce lock-on time. I'd suggest doing this, not for Clusters, but for every other missile. Too often, long missile locks are spoiled by lag, which sours players on them (and GSF in general). Shortening lock times across the board (except for Cluster Missiles) is a safe fix that will be good for GSF as a whole..

PLEASE do not take away Distortion Field missile break. The game was very unbalanced back when the glitches caused the DF break to be removed. I think one of the main problem with losing the break is that, in deathmatch, seeker mine/railgun drone combo (and therefore gs-bomberball) becomes too strong. Instead of tunneling a gunship or bomber and popping DF to deal with a seeker, I had to take a less efficient attack path. Or even worse, if the bomber timed a seeker mine drop properly then I'd have to peel from my attack entirely. Not good for meta balance.

Also, in domination mode I think it's important for Scouts to have the DF missile break so that they can tunnel Ramparts while briefly ignoring everything else. Otherwise the Rampart bomber becomes a little safer in its nest and therefore the balance starts to get out of whack. As it is, stacking Ramparts with hyperspace beacon cycling might be slightly overpowered, so don't make it harder for Scouts to burst them. Yes yes I know Scouts aren't supposed to counter Bombers. But hey, the game is great the way it is, don't meddle too much with what's not broken.

I like option 2 a lot.

I really like the ideas to change the way ion railgun energy drain is treated but I would want it to stay pretty much the same vs Scouts and Gunships so that current meta balance isn't sacrificed. It would certainly require some precise tinkering. Same goes for the changes to the way deflection armor/charged plating takes damage. Great idea but I feel like it is impossible to make this build balanced for Strikes without making it overpowered on Bombers. And even if it was possible, the amount of tinkering required to get it perfect would take more than one patch, which is not likely feasible at this point (we'll be super lucky to get one patch).

-----

Not part of the original post, but I want to comment on this too:

I regularly fly builds maximized for range, because I enjoy the style. When I'm killing something at 6900m, I'm not wishing, "Man I wish I could've engaged this guy at 8500m." I'm too busy worrying about anything getting within 3000m of me. Or the Gunship who is going to Ion me from 15000m.

And in Domination, it doesn't matter what my range is--my target can just fly around a satellite and deny me LOS.

I use range capacitors almost exclusively as well. It's not so much that the increase in deathmatch engagement distance would help (although it would, because you would consume less engines to get there and put yourself less close into dangerous enemy territory). It's the fact that you could engage from your usual distance of 6500-6900 and still be able to shoot the guy as he boosts away. And being able to shoot under a satellite at 8500m would be absolutely beneficial. Your tracking penalty would be next to nil at that range -- you'd be able to center and snipe even fast dancing BLC scouts.

Or how about the time when you are flying a Clarion and get partly ion zapped to the point where you have zero engines but still a decent bar of blaster pool? You power dive toward the gunship but only manage to get to about the 7000m range where you then are a sitting duck. With the extra range you could be happily smacking him hard with Quads (remaining shields moved to your front) while laughing at his followup slug railgun. As it is now, you can only get into Quad range if the ion railgun hit you at around the sub 12000m range. If you're hit outside of that range you are better off power diving to safety (LoS). Don't you think it be a powerful ability for the Clarion to be able to immediately power dive and shoot at whatever enemy just shot at it? On the other hand, it would decrease the skill ceiling for Clarion pilots. Currently flying a Clarion well requires a very good awareness of enemy ship distances, power dive distance, and energy levels. As soon as I am hit by a railgun, I hit the R key and immediately make a fight or flight judgement based on ranges and current energy levels.

Edited May 29, 2015 by RickDagles

tommmsunb · May 29, 2015

I think the pike is an entirely different ship from the starguard so changes to one might not really affect the other too much.

What I'd like to ask Alex is how much development time they're able to devote, I'm assuming new art resources are out of the question but I might as well ask?

GRIM_REAPER_Xdc · May 29, 2015

So! What are your pet peeves about Strike Fighters? If you could only pick one section to buff would you choose to improve their Maneuverability, Secondary Weapons, Primary Weapons or Defense? Or something different? What would make them more effective in both game modes?

NOTE: I will be using abbreviations commonly found, for those who don't know them they are as follows: GS=Gunship SF=Strike Fighter

Haven't had a chance to read the other posts but since this is just a feedback I guess having the same feedback as others is probably a good thing. This might be a bit bulky but it is what it is,

Pet Peeves you ask? well that would have to be the fact that it seems the strike fighter seems to have been used as the base for the others in comparing, as most devs do, they create a basic unit then create variations thus developing unique classes. In the case of the SF it isn't so much as what it has but what it doesn't.

The Scout was clearly designed to be a hit and run ship, so much so that now Strike Fighters don't have the time to take them out before they get in too close and it becomes a maneuverability battle.

When combatting Gunships, scouts rely on speed & agility to close the gap while avoiding damage or the element of surprise in being able to sneak up on Gunships unawares in a matter of seconds, Bombers rely on their drones/mines & heavy armour to avoid dying, & Gunship well, it pretty much comes down to who shoots first. Strike fighters on the other hand have none of these things resulting in being gunned down before entering range

When fighting bombers the key is heavy firepower and agility to get out of the way of mines/ etc as already covered SF's have neither so that's generally why they lose here as well.

now, " If you could only pick one section to buff would you choose to improve their Maneuverability, Secondary Weapons, Primary Weapons or Defense?" Trying to take the easy route a bit with this one I see, The answer isn't as simple as buffing one of those sections by 10% or so and saying "it's what the community wanted". What strike fighters really need is something unique to the class, something that won't make them the same as everything else, bombers have the defense, scouts have the Maneuverability & Gunships have the Secondary Weapons. Primary Weapons don't really play much by themselves either which is what the SF's currently have. From here I've come up with a few options.

1. Radar jamming ability so for say 20 seconds they can't be seen on the map and the only way to target them is if you have them inside your reticle then they light up again.

2. More powerful Primary Weapons & Maneuverability, eg. Add a global shield/ DR bypass to Strike fighter primary weapons permanently (maybe integrate them into an upgrade) This maintains their essence as a fighter without compromising their role.

3. Longer range Primary Weapons ( this is separate because long range powerful weapons is OP)

Also on a side note when are we getting more game modes, I would really love to see an Assault type map (look at Unreal Tournament 2004 Mothership assault) you can essentially have it like a PvP op. You start in space and then it leads into a couple types of game modes on the ground (bypassing the space/ land combination) where you could capture bridge points or plant explosives etc. OR a map type that revolves around attack & defense of a single objective eg protect your capital ship

Edited May 29, 2015 by GRIM_REAPER_Xdc

RickDagles · May 29, 2015

1. Radar jamming ability so for say 20 seconds they can't be seen on the map and the only way to target them is if you have them inside your reticle then they light up again.

Cool idea, but this is basically what Stealth ships were supposed to be (the cancelled ship type).

space_mechanic · May 29, 2015

First of all, thank you for looking into GSF again.

Speaking of changes to Strikes, it doesn't have to be a "buff". Instead, it could be rework/rethink of certain ability.

I'd like to see Directional Shield reworked:

1) In a way that it doesn't fallback to neutral after you switch it to front/rear. Currently I set it to front, for example, but a few seconds later frontal direction resets to middle.

2) Set frontal direction as first option. Currently, as far as I remember, shield sets to rear. So you need to click it again to go mid, then again to front. Not very convenient when you want to destroy turret or mitigate gunship rail shot.

Verain · May 29, 2015

This week at work has been (and still is) an absolute nightmare. This dev post has made my... month? I dunno, it's pretty amazing. The idea that we'll see some balance changes is just like, the greatest thing.

It is so great. Thanks Alex!

I’ll be blunt. Strike Fighters need lots of love. The original design is that they are the Jack-of-All and Master-of-None but they have filled out this role too well and because of it are rarely a compelling option.

First, finding out that they are actually intended as a well-rounded fighter is HUGE. I've scolded folks for assuming this because we didn't know dev intent. Now we know dev intent!!!

We also know you guys want to fix strikes.

So.

Happy.

We want to talk about how Strike Fighters can be made into a good option to bring in any match, by any skill level.

Ok, to the rivets. If you intend them as being a power-balanced and well rounded ship, you have a huge challenge, because the other ships are specialized. You absolutely have given the strikes a huge variety of weapons and engines- I think more than any other class- so it stands to reason that dev intent is that these weapon choices span a range of playstyles and specialties.

So! What are your pet peeves about Strike Fighters?

> No role

> Unable to do anything to the game state when running / hiding.

> Unable to meaningfully threaten to change gamestate if not pressured.

> Trivial to peel.

> Lack of damage to targets that are not just a torso IRL

> Only strange utility builds viable on a node.

> Less able to damage targets on a node than ANY other class- even a gunship in melee at a node outperforms a strike.

> Variety pack of engine components leaves them as unviable scouts

- Weapon Power Converter is garbage on almost any ship, but particularly garbage on strikes.

- Lack of choice of good components greatly narrows builds.

- Converting engine power to shield is barely worthwhile on a bomber who is forced to tank, really bad on a strike.

> (Type 1) Charged plating is a worthless trap without an armor component. This shield is entirely wasted on the type 1 strike.

> Poor secondary choices except on Clarion. A ship build to be tanky should be missing neither armor, nor shielding.

> Great amount of ground to cover with a missing system component (type 1 and type 2 strikes)

> (Type 3) All system options but repair probes are undertuned.

> Helpless versus gunships at range AND helpless versus scouts at melee AND helpless versus bombers at node.

- Choose a weakness and give them that, they can't just get literally all of them. Not ok!

If you could only pick one section to buff would you choose to improve their Maneuverability, Secondary Weapons, Primary Weapons or Defense?

Primary Weapons- Since you are asking "pick just one section" as a way of getting some feedback, this. Getting nose to target on a strike fighter is VASTLY harder than a scout. Keeping it there is even harder than that. The reward for it is LESS than on a scout. Or a gunship. Strikes deal damage with their blasters in similar measure to bombers. Strikes should deal lethal damage when they are on targets, any target should be unwilling to tank the blasters of a strike fighter..

This means that I want a passive buff to strike fighter blaster damage. This boring-sounding buff would make fighting a strike deadly.

If we aren't just limited to ONE of those, I would say:

> Strike turning and speed should be closer to scouts than they currently are. A 5% boost on both of these would help immensely (scouts have 13% more turning than strikes on live)

> Strikes could get a moderate boost to accuracy and damage with blasters (5% accuracy, 10% damage)

> Strikes could lock on 15% faster with their secondary weapons.

> Strikes could have a reduced cooldown on engine component cooldown- 10%.

> Strikes could get "shield hardness", a negative shield bleedthrough, of 5%.

In order to make strikes actually able to be generalists, you would want to add or buff components.

Engine:

Weapon power converter is bad. Engine to shield converter is normally unwise. The type 2 strike should have retro thrusters. Strikes quite clearly split the difference on these components- they have half scout components, and half gunship/bomber components. If they are going to have these "stand and tank/shoot" components, then they need to be good. A bomber can choose them because they don't have a decent movement choice, a strike cannot. If you randomly replaced scout components with engine-to-shield, no one would touch it. Weapon power converter might actually make high scores versus food, but only because the scouts have disto. These components are bad, and they crap up the component list.

Shield:

Not having disto appears to be a design choice. But there are still poor components here aplenty. Quick Charge is a little weaker than it should be. Directionals is generally liked, but does leave you out of breath almost constantly. But those are the good shields: charged plating is entirely without merit on the type 1 stirke, and should be fixed, replaced, or redesigned. Shield projector should be buffed rather heavily- why not give it a 12km range or something, if you like the idea of the group buff?

System:

Combat Command needs to be buffed. It could have a dramatically longer range of effect (12km radius), have more effects when active, stay active longer, or have a shorter cooldown. Remote slicing needs a longer range, or the ability to disable shield active could be baseline (meaning you could interrupt shield and engine mastered). Overall, Type 3 Strikes are the best strikes, and repair probes are actually useful, so these are a lot lower priority. Would just be nice for them to be worth something.

My biggest problem with the strikes is that, if I try to build a strike to be good at something, I can't.

If I choose rapid fire laser, retros, and cluster missiles, I'm telling the game engine I want to be able to kill a battle scout. This doesn't really happen. If the design is that no build should be able to beat a battle scout, honestly, I'm fine with that- but that's not really a generalist build with an array of cool arrows to shoot for every occasion, that's a mediocre dogfighter with no one to dogfight. Choosing short range components with low tracking penalties, along with stacking a bunch of +accuracy, at the expense of armor piercing, should be able to kill a battle scout. This build certainly pays- it can't hurt gunships, can't do much at a node, can't chase targets, can't hurt bombers who afk- but what did I buy with it?

If I choose protons or thermites and heavy lasers (or thermite/quad on Clarion), I'm signalling my desire to be good at killing bombers, and saying that I'm probably not gonna have much game against scouts. The second part is true, the first part is only accurate if the bomber got ionned on his way to do his job, in which case, all I'm doing is saving my gunship a little bit of mana.

Where is my 12km missile that does light damage and locks on pretty fast? That'll deroost a gunship, right? What button do I press to actually hurt a bomber on the node? This is left-click with BLC, but with a bunch of high tracking penalty weapons, especially the rather good heavy laser, I either can't hit the target (heavies), can't hit the target AND can't pierce the armor (quads, lights), or can't pierce the armor (rapids). Why every choice but the one that matters? It's ok to not give strikes BLC. It's probably wise. But this defeats them as generalists, because it means that they can't do ANYTHING on the node except hold it white while calling in the real ships.

A generalist ship would get to choose an 11km railgun, a 12km missile, a mine that explodes for 1/4 damage but with half the cooldown of the bomber's mines, and of course, something that can hurt a battle scout. None of that is around, and most isn't within kit.

Anyway, I'll type more later, and I'm so damned happy that the devs have been summoned in some aspect.

SithAceI · May 29, 2015

We used an acronym in the military called : K.I.S.S. (keep it simple stupid)

First eliminate rapid fire lasers from the game, they are trash can and nobody uses them. Make ions the default first weapon on the Tier one strike fighters. (And whatever the scouts have next in line hehe.)

Starguard/Rycer : With what was said above make Ions range 8k, so they mesh with quads and heavies.

Give all strikes a component that makes Ion weapons in-effective (even other strike fighters ions)

Give ALL strike fighter's DF as an option.

Pike/Quell : Make all (non-cluster) missile reticules 50% larger so as to make it easier to keep targets in lock.

And what is stated above for tier one strikes. Maybe a little less lock on time on protons.

Tier three strike's are pretty good so maybe just the extra options listed above also.

I tried to keep this simple and I hope you all will like my suggestions.

The ion's will help eliminate all other ship types pretty equally well.

Giving strikes the DF option should help the QQing about DF etc. Then everyone has two missile breaks, everybody happy happy happy!

The only thing I did not address was mobility, but with ion weapons being in-effective loosing all your engine pool should be a thing of the past. Hell with the ions in-effective and an extra missile break plus larger missile reticules should, even the playing field a bit.

There Stike's are fixed lol!

Nightmaregale · May 29, 2015

First Things first: Thank you for the attention on GSF =D I'm looking forward to any upgrades

And now back to topic.

I like the Strike fighters and have played them a little at least i tried to find the perfect build for me and tested them. For me the most important part about the strike fighters is that they are easier to fly with in the beginning, and are more durable than a scout. Sadly most strikes in an average opponent team are far more easier to hit that they are more durable in comparison with scouts. Here are my thoughts on making them OP and better for New Pilots. Note that some of these things might have been used before ^^

Against Other ships:

Based on the Assumption of Good Pilots flying against each other in these scenarios.

Against Scouts: The Strike has no change in a dogfight since the scout can outturn him. The only option available is jousting starting at the Strikes max. range or following a scout and attacking from behind. To make the Dogfights more equal it would be great if Scout and Strike had the same turningspeed. This would also help using the missiles.

Against Bombers: Bombers are also annoying to fight against. Most Strikes have armour Penetration but still it is hard to get a missile Lock on with armor Pen or hit with HLCs while the Bomber flyes around the satelite. Thus you cannot kill the Bomber before Mines and drones destroy you most of the time. Thus the Strike would welcome more Damage, a shorter lock-on and an even higher durability (more hull, damage reduction, shield capacity, reg, ...)

Against Gunships:

A surprise attack is deadly like for everyone. If you attack one from an angle or behind the strike is damaging the gunship and scaring it up. After that the strike hunts the Gunship like every other ship. In this scenario the Strike is like every one else, more damage would help though.

Next about my ideas to make the strikes shipy better and maybe meta relevant.

T1 Strike Starguard/ Rycer:

The key mechanic of the T1 is the ability to switch the lasers. Normally you have a long range lasere like Quads or HLC and a shortrange Laser for dogfights, etc. like Ion or maybe RFLC. Iz might be a good idea to buff the Ion Cannon -> maybe increasing the energy drain. Instead of buffing it you could trade the rapids for a pair of BLCs whitch would also increase the shortrange Lasers. The Longrange Lasers are ok but a buff like increased damage, armorpiercing or shield piercing cannot hurt to make it op.

The secondary weapons are okay.

A huge problem for the T1 as far as my opinion goes are the shields. Charged Plating isn't even an option due to the lack of armor. Quick-Charge shild is okay since it adds engine power reg and 60% regeneration while taking damage. But if you choose Quick Charge Shilds and go for the reg reactor you still cannot regenerate the shields fast enough to survive that long if you use the large reactor you need even longer. Additionally your Shield Power Capacity is rather low and the active ability recharges too litle and the CD is too large. The directional Shilds cuts both ways on one side you are nearly impragnable but if anything hits you on the other side you are likely dead. Good points are the reduced delay (down to 3 secs and 1,2 with turbo reactor) and higher capacity (2520 with large reactor). Additionally it takes its time to point your shields in the right direction (Sometimes too much time ^^).To make Quick-charge and Directional better you could increase Bonus or decrease the Malus on Shiel Capacity, Regeneration and Delay or buff the Active ability of both. Adding DF or any other Shield would not be better than a buff in my point of view.

As for the engines, as mentioned above (^^) you should make another Power Dive or give the T1 access to it.

If You go through with these Changes you might get a Ship that can attack constantly from 6900meters to 550 with powerfull shields that are hopefully lasting long enough to run away, win or get saved.

T2 Quell/Rycer:

The HLCs and Quads are ok here again increased damage, armorepen, crit, shield piercing, etc. is encouraged.

I seriously love the ability to switch the missiles and thus being able to chain missile hits. The Cluster missile is definetly good on this ship but the second missile (concussion for me) needs an upgrade if the ship wants to be a part of the meta. You could decrease to Lock on Time for the torpedo and the Concussion, make the ion missile more like an ion railgun or even better, increase the radius of emp to clear the node for sure if and maybe buff the debuff with somethin like the thermite buff, also you could add Interdiction Missiles.

The shield are different though. Quick-charge and Directional Shields are not good enough without a Reactor right know. You could exchange the Armor component with an Reactor one if you want to make those 2 better or buff them like mention in the T1 Section. Thus I settle for Charged Plating, which gives me an awesome 94% Damgereduction, higher Shield caaciyty and an possibillity to regain some engine power when crushing into an object (thanks to the damage reduction you survive the crash in nearly all cases). This also helps after being hit by an ionrail. The disadvantage is the fear of armorpenetration reducing the effect of it as mentioned in other posts would be a good solution and you might add extra 5% reduction to all Strikes to get to the 99% like the Bomber and since you want an OP strike it shouldn't be a problem.

As far as the engines are flying you still want an good Missile lock breaker if possible. For the T2 it isn't as important as the T1 since CP weakens most missiles and it helps you covering some distance.

All in all i think the T2 is already a good ship it just needs more damage.

T3 Clarion/Imperium

Crazy ideas first ^^

Give it BLCs, make the Proton comparable to a Slug railgun (better Lock on time, CD, crit, range, etc.) and boost its maneuverability add in the already existing Healpower (increase the duration of the HoT or the Amount it repaires per tick), Charged Plating (94% damage reduction going up to 99% maybe) and a wonderfull missile lock breaker in Power dive. You woul get an JACK-OF-ALL: it can be as deadly as a Scout, it has the range of a gunship and it is as Durable as a Bomber under a node.

Now for the serious breack down:

The T3 is already a good ship but it needs more Power/ Damage to be able to take a serious Part in the Meta.

The Lasers aren't good at all the best are Quads (which are ok for now). Any buff increasing the Damage dealt is encouraged.

The Missiles are a joke. The Torpedos deal a Serious amount of Damage which is ok, but it is too hard to make them hit throught the narrow firing arc, the long missile lock-on and the too long CD after a missile Break. The ion an EMP missiles are too weak. They make not enough damage and the debuff and abillities are not good enough as an excuse. You could add either Interdiction, Cluster, Pods or Concussion (best would be the upgraded version with an shorter Lock on time 2 seconds woulde be enough). The Other Options would be upgrading the known missiles: Ion could profit of an Higher Power Drain, an aoe (like the railgun) instead of additional ammunition or the increased range, or of an increased regeneration slow. EMP definitly needs an larger AOE effect so you definitly engulf the whole satelite or Bomber camp with an Debuff. Increased Damage might be nice and the same goes for crit and the Duration of the Debuff. I guess anything slightly better than now would be enough for the T3

This ship has lovely Systems.

The rapair probes are good but no one would say no to a longer duration, more and stronger ticks, a shorter CD, etc. Combat Comand is good too but inferior to BOC and TT. Thus, it would be grade if it had a comparable CD it might also get better if it could enhance the secondary weapons too (Snipers might love you =D). Oh before I forget it more crit wouldnot hurt either for it being OP. Remote Slicing could get nasty with upgrades like removing the rangelimit ( if think there was one if i am correct) and again increasing the amount of energy drain and the duration leaving an enemy with 1 or fewer missile breaks and without engine power.

I won't mention the directional shield again since it is the same case as the T1. Charged Plating is definetly usabel again and 99% would make it even better. Shield Projector is ok, too. You could increase the amount of shield energy regenerated / time or reduce the CD further additional standard buffs like more Shield capacity are encouraged again. Mayve an upgraded Quick-Charge Shield or an DF could fit in the T3 either as an additional option or as an exchange for Directional Shields.

The engine abilitys are realy good already since it has Power Dive or the Shield Power Converter.

You might want to exchange the Sensors with Thrusters though ^^

Lastly how to make it a better ship for New Pilots

You definitly want better stock options, so you don't need to buy the components for a good built. Also I think boosted missiles would help new pilots, too. Because it is easier to get a missile lock-on than hitting the enemy in the beginning.

Hopefully my ideas are helpfull

greetings

Lordal / Nightmaregale

Let's talk about Strike Fighters

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Announcements